I have mixed feelings about the various arguments I see raised in the comments. It seems crazy to me to insist that efficiency and productivity gains via technology have, as their proper goal, a world in which none of that matters. Freeing up time in this way benefits us as individuals as well. Just staying alive and entertaining ourselves requires goal-directed behavior. I like not having to spend hours cooking food daily on an open fire.
Your argument about keyboards struck me in just this way - it's a mistake to assume that we should stick with the status quo and have machines adapt to us. After all, writing on paper (or with a digital stylus) is just another iteration of improving the technology. Nobody wants to pound symbols into stone with a chisel, for example.
I can type much faster than I can write cursively and it would be incredibly painful to revert to such writing. Natural language speech input can improve a lot of things vs typing, but I think writing code - for as long as it lasts - would be tricky to implement well using our voices.
It doesn't though. It only requires for life to have evolved on another planet, reached space and then potentially traveled lightyears through space to reach earth.
Space is really fucking empty. Seems less likely than throwing a rock out of a rocket on the way to mars and hitting a random bucket, without looking. Add to that that it would require life having evolved while the universe was younger and different to the only state of the universe that we know to support life.
Is it impossible. No. But at that point the theory has as much explanatory power as creationism, i.e. none.
This made me laugh, yes I agree in a way. Maybe some day we will discover amino acid constituents on earth or another planet and it will fill in more of the blanks. It's the definition of chicken and egg though
Thanks for the link and for the reminder, did learn about this experiment actually in organic chemistry years ago. Suppose it's a bit nonsensical to look for amino acid "constituents" then. Not a fan of the snark though
That seems to be an odd way of looking at it, IMO. Most of the time, the entire point of building an API is to present consistent functionality to any consumer, not only ones under your control. Also, a well-behaved API is versioned so as to allow evolution of the API without breaking existing clients who can upgrade to new versions as they are able.
Are there significant risks from running virtualization locally like this? If so, can you provide any links or elaborate a bit so I can follow up? Most of what I've seen on such vulnerabilities refer to server infrastructure.
Having searched through my browsing history and some web searches it seems you're right. I do wonder if the move to more virtualisation outside of the server world will open up additional vulnerabilities but it does look like that's where most of the trouble is at the moment.
Seems like that would require an understanding of language that far exceeds the current state of the art. And much of the time logic doesn't even apply because the text is incoherent.
The things you cite as missing in C# can be found in F# on .NET Core. Have you ever tried it? I find it hard to stomach C# after delving deeply into F#, and you still get to use Dapper! Swagger though... not sure if anyone ever got that working well with Giraffe or any other more functional web framework. When I say "working" I mean automatically generating the Swagger docs for you.
I'm genuinely curious if there are black or African American programmers who actually use git who are offended by the term. Speaking for myself (white programmer) it just seems to be an obvious use of the adjective form of the word as either the principal branch (like master bath) or the branch from which other branches are copied (as in the initial, pristine version). If there are such comments I haven't come across them yet.
There are several comments by other white people who see this as a highly commendable act. Does anyone actually subject to racism see this move as a positive step that addresses a real problem?
This made me laugh out loud. Early this afternoon I walked by a local church on the way to do some shopping and there was a group of 8 or 9 people kneeling in front of it praying. They were holding signs with various slogans, one of which said exactly that: Churches are vital business.
I should mention this is a Catholic church that serves the Eucharist during every mass where multiple people hand out wafers to eat, using their bare hands.
[edit: grammar and additions]
Catholicism has a long storied history, so there are provisions for almost everything.
I remember in school learning that if you were on shipwrecked on a desert island, you or anyone else could perform sacraments yourself and they would count just as well as if they were done by a priest.
This is the practice of “spiritual communion”. In modern times, it has most notably been used where a person is sick, or otherwise inaccessible to a priest (e.g. stuck in a mine shaft or on an oil rig or in space). This is currently what the Catholic Pope is promoting.
There is also a happy debate going on about if you can perform sacraments via the internet. There is nothing liturgical about distance to the participant. The rules regarding sacraments are more about intention and who is performing it. Some priest believe that physical presence is always unimportant, but our slow moving Papacy takes a more conservative stance.
