weberc2

43 ms·

421.
by weberc2 7y ago
Maybe voter fraud is "vanishingly rare", but that statement in the wikipedia article only links to a NYT article which says: > Academic studies have repeatedly concluded that fraud at the ballot box — the sort that photo identi
422.
by weberc2 7y ago
What then do the upvotes signify?
423.
by weberc2 7y ago
Another poster linked to this, which is the clearest explanation I've seen to date: http://freakonomics.com/podcast/the-true-story-of-the-gender... The most likely explanation is not that society values male work
424.
by weberc2 7y ago
If the inequity is due to free people freely making different choices, then it is strictly better than coercing people to make the choices <some group> wants them to make. It is eminently desirable that _all_ people are free, even if
425.
by weberc2 7y ago
It's all well and good to understand why this is, but if the answer is "because, on average, women prefer a different distribution of work", then we should let that be. There's this creepy urge to pressure women to share
426.
by weberc2 7y ago
Downvotes are fine with me; I don't put much stock in Internet points. I'm not trying to be persuasive in my single-sentence internet quip; if people care to learn more, they can do their own research.
427.
by weberc2 7y ago
And if you account for other factors, like flexibility and other benefits, you get within the margin of error--women may even out-earn men.
428.
by weberc2 7y ago
> Depends if you want to wait for the CI system to upload or not. Also if you want CI to have commit permissions. I guess you could deploy first and verify automatically later. Hadn’t thought of that. > Debian is at something like 90%
429.
by weberc2 7y ago
The problem is dependency graphs aren’t strictly hierarchical, so it doesn’t suffice to say “rebuild whenever something under this directory changes”.
430.
by weberc2 7y ago
We’re having a semantic debate. Ownership appears to mean something different to Rust folks, which is fine. I agree that Rust’s borrow checker (what you appear to be referring to as ownership or the enforcer thereof) prevents errors and is
431.
by weberc2 7y ago
(Sorry for being terse—on mobile). Validate the binary matches what? If the compiler has to compile the artifact to verify the artifact provided by the developer, why bother having the developer commit the artifact? The CI system could just
432.
by weberc2 7y ago
They use a tool called Blaze (Google around for “Bazel” which is the open source tool inspired by it). Basically you model the dependency tree such that the tool knows which targets are affected by a certain change, and then Blaze builds th
433.
by weberc2 7y ago
So where do these binaries get built and how does the system know which binaries to rebuild for a given change? If developers are building binaries and committing them directly, doesn’t that open up security or even correctness issues? How
434.
by weberc2 7y ago
I wasn’t trying to be a pedant, I’ve just never heard of anyone doing this. I was wondering how it helped solve the problem of not rebuilding everything.
435.
by weberc2 7y ago
Can you elaborate on “monorepos do not prevent you from checking packages into source control” and how that helps to avoid recompiling everything? Why would you check a package into source control anyway? Surely source control is for source
436.
by weberc2 7y ago
Thanks for responding, Steve. I understand that “ownership” implies the right to destroy in any language. The bit I’m not so clear about is whether or not there are other rights/responsibilities (such as the right to mutate) as the OP
437.
by weberc2 7y ago
When I moved to France I would use the Canadian French keyboard layout which was QWERTY-based with subtle changes and a whole bunch of modifiers for different accents above/below standard Roman letters. I was surprised at how quickly I
438.
by weberc2 7y ago
Ok, then educate me—what is ownership if not the responsibility for managing (cleaning up) a resource? In my C and C++ days, I never heard of it refer to some kind of exclusive permission to mutate a resource (which seems to be your meaning
439.
by weberc2 7y ago
It doesn’t assume a fixed amount of money. The total amount could grow and JPL could still see their cut shrink.
440.
by weberc2 7y ago
I don’t support the conspiracy theory, but the shortage isn’t potential robotic missions, it’s money for missions.
441.
by weberc2 7y ago
Ownership is different than mutability. Yes, immutability would prevent those errors.
442.
by weberc2 7y ago
Most languages have a GC so there really is no ownership to pretend away (if you like, everything is owned by the GC). Rust can be super cool without inventing fake problems for other languages.
443.
by weberc2 7y ago
From your own link: > As our business grew, so did our resource utilization and latencies; to keep Schemaless performant, we needed a solution that would execute well at scale. That's the third sentence. Clearly it was not an "
444.
by weberc2 7y ago
This seems really excessive. You'd have to have really good tooling to build, deploy, and debug (since log streams are oriented per-function, not per-request), and I'm not sure how that could be performant, especially if you'
445.
by weberc2 7y ago
I'll bite. Why do you suppose it's an emotional decision? And why do you assume they're rewriting things and not writing new code in support of their business model?
446.
by weberc2 7y ago
Another at-least-as-valid perspective is that there is so much shit software because developers feel the need to flex their cleverness and end up making a mess of overly abstract code that can't be safely modified or extended. These de
447.
by weberc2 7y ago
You see this a lot with HTTP requests. People realize they're often writing the same code over and over and so they pull it out into a middleware of some kind. It's trading off a little readability in exchange for DRYness.
448.
by weberc2 7y ago
> Because CMake contrary to Bazel do not break its retro-compatibility in its options and config every two minor versions ? Lol that’s only recently true. CMake was infamous for breaking compatibility. Anyway, Bazel was pre-1.0 until jus
449.
by weberc2 7y ago
Also—and this is the biggest deal for me—mac is the only trackbar that works.
450.
by weberc2 7y ago
I get not wanting a JVM (although all else equal I’ll take the JVM dependency any day over CMake), but how is CMake _more_ reproducible than Bazel? The latter builds in a clean room, Make does not.

More ›