ragnese

9 ms·

61.
by ragnese 2y ago
All of them?
62.
by ragnese 2y ago
> I know nothing about pathology, but in terms of software, I think slower adoption to new tech is what we need, especially when the "new tech" is just a 5% faster javascript framework. I hope that's not the definition peo
63.
by ragnese 2y ago
I've not heard/read this before, but I use Mullvad and my anecdotal experience confirms this. I get blocked or put into a captcha trap quite frequently. I assumed this would be an issue for any/all well-known VPN IPs. Are you
64.
by ragnese 2y ago
Yikes. Replying because I noticed my egregious typo: "theirs", not "there's".
65.
by ragnese 2y ago
That can certainly be true, too. But different people will have different thresholds for how much enshitification is too much. So, you hit your threshold in 2020 and OP hit there's today.
66.
by ragnese 2y ago
I have a similar question. I always heard/read that the whole "pennies cost more to make than they're worth" argument was a red herring, in that it doesn't really matter how much they cost to make "at rest&quo
67.
by ragnese 2y ago
Interesting observation. I agree and upvoted. ;) EDIT: I'm not being sarcastic, either, BTW. But, I do love the irony of writing a positive reply to your comment.
68.
by ragnese 2y ago
I mean, it's certainly settled for me. At the same time, I think it would dishonest to insinuate that there are NOT people claiming the Earth is flat on the internet (Honestly, I don't believe that flat-earthers actually believe t
69.
by ragnese 2y ago
Quite true!
70.
by ragnese 2y ago
> The debate has never been "will consuming less calories than you expend make you lose weight" Maybe the debate amongst actual doctors and researchers. But, the debate amongst dummies on the internet (social media) CERTAINLY h
71.
by ragnese 2y ago
We also risk losing so much utter nonsense and false information that I'm not at all worried. You want to learn history and science? Buy some (vetted) history and science books. The number of times I had to correct my step-son when he
72.
by ragnese 2y ago
I was convinced at the time--and I'm still convinced--that there was a TON of astroturfing on places like Reddit and even here when Nadella became CEO of Microsoft and there was that whole "Microsoft hearts Open Source" cam
73.
by ragnese 2y ago
Exactly. Even the people who complain about these things immediately get defensive when you call them out on their uses: "Well, I can't switch because what about my banking app?" or "Well, games don't count as sof
74.
by ragnese 2y ago
It's fun to think through examples like this. But, of course, we need to exercise caution because so much is dependent on the specific contexts of each individual project. First, I will say that I probably misspoke (mistyped...?) by us
75.
by ragnese 2y ago
You definitely won't find me defending Java too often. And I certainly agree that there are frustrating limitations. Like you said, it's annoying that Java does have ad-hoc union types, but only for the throws list in function
76.
by ragnese 2y ago
But, this isn't you complaining about checked exceptions vs Result. This is you complaining about Java's overall syntax style vs Rust's. Phrased another way, Java's syntax is fairly verbose for everything , not just f
77.
by ragnese 2y ago
I generally disagree with you. I think that Result/Try types are essentially isomorphic to checked exceptions. > Java's checked exceptions are the worst. Having to declare every exception thrown as a part of your API/ABI m
78.
by ragnese 2y ago
You can have generic `throws` markers; e.g., interface Frobinicator<E extends Exception> { void frobinicate() throws E; }
79.
by ragnese 2y ago
Yeah, fair point about dtrace, et al, but I think my statement is still fine in context, since we're specifically talking about these Rust libraries that collect stack traces for error types. And I agree and love having statically chec
80.
by ragnese 2y ago
Yeah, that whole statement there is probably unnecessary and I can see it being off-putting. I'll edit it if I still can. However, I just want to make it clear that I wasn't intending to call anyone a "bad programmer". A
81.
by ragnese 2y ago
You're not far off. This is one of my favorite topics in programming language design discussions, and I have opinions that some may even say are "controversial". For what it's worth, I've been writing Rust in produc
82.
by ragnese 2y ago
I find it pretty egregious that someone who is saving/investing a chunk of every paycheck could be considered to be "living paycheck-to-paycheck." I feel like the most obvious definition most of us would assume is that nearly
83.
by ragnese 2y ago
Oh, bummer. I definitely had assumed that they were a single "device".
84.
by ragnese 2y ago
Eh. If it's not a physical power-disconnect switch, one could imagine it still being able to record audio, which still sucks.
85.
by ragnese 2y ago
Oh, it's definitely malicious compliance. I have no doubt.
86.
by ragnese 2y ago
You've been sharing this exact narrative all over the thread, which makes me think that you aren't really replying to my comment so much as you're just finding any pretense to share this same opinion again. > The sentiment
87.
by ragnese 2y ago
1. I didn't say it was impressive. Just refuting the claim that the Republican party puts forth candidates that the electorate wants while the Democratic party does not. 2. Nobody has beaten Trump since he's been a convicted crimi
88.
by ragnese 2y ago
Both Hilary Clinton and Joe Biden got more votes than Donald Trump. The Democrats have a better track record of picking the more popular candidate that the electorate wants in recent history. In fact, the Democratic candidate has won the po
89.
by ragnese 2y ago
> Yes, but the theorem is meant to explain what can happen in the universe over long time scales. I never understood it that way. I always interpreted it as a fun way to explain the mathematical truth that no matter how low a probability
90.
by ragnese 2y ago
The waiting was hard, or your child having the phone in 7th grade was hard?

More ›