But IMO that’s one reason weird UX/design is not uncommon and can persist in dev ecosystems. The intended users are more proficient than average and most are able to work around most issues.

Maintaining vacuum is difficult and most likely more expensive than just using a cheap energy source

For example, a solar salt distillation system can be totally passive, even if slow and space inefficient: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_still

If the goal is evaporative distillation, it makes no sense to use a process that begins with filling and conaminating the entire system with contaminated water

You’d have more success keeping the container clean (full of air) and pumping all the air out of it, which is still probably less efficient than other means like boiling

IMO wardrobe concerns should come far behind health. Is this not a serious “all hands on deck” health situation? Are you sure considering custom tailoring is the correct life prioritization to take right now?

I’ve had to resort to “do not disturb” 100% of the time, with the “allow contacts to bypass DND”

IMO it’s time for a reckoning of what’s systematic/automated vs what’s not.

For example, “no expectation of privacy in public” meant you should be okay with appearing in someone else’s (manual) photo while out in public. However, I don’t think that should extend to persistent systematic surveillance, e.g. suppose every Tesla’s camera captures were combined with person recognition systems and tracking.

Just because something is theoretically okay at a small scale doesn’t mean the same applies at large scales.

Another example: Society funds public roads via government taxes for personal use and for regulated commercial use. Uber systematically consumes public road space under the guise of personal use vehicles, for commercial use.

It’s a container with certain behaviors and guarantees making them easy and reliable to manipulate and compose. A practical example is a generic List, that behaves like:

• List[1, 2, 3], i.e. (“new”, “unit”, “wrap”) to create, containing obj(s)
• map(func) to transform objs inside, List[A] -> List[B]
• first(), i.e. (“unwrap”, “value”) to get back the obj
• flat_map(func), i.e. (“bind”) to un-nest one level when func(a) itself produces another List, e.g. [3, 4].flat_map(get_divisors) == flatten_once([[1, 3], [1, 2, 4]]) == [1, 3, 1, 2, 4]

Consider the code to do these things using for loops – the “business logic” func() would be embedded and interlaced with flow control.

The same is true of Maybe, a monad to represent something or nothing, i.e. a “list” of at most one, i.e. a way to avoid “null”.

Consider how quickly things get messy when there are multiple functions and multiple edge cases like empty lists or "null"s to deal with. In those cases, monads like List and Maybe really help clean things up.

IMO the composability really can’t be understated. “Composing” ten for loops via interlacing and if checks and nesting sounds like a nightmare, whereas a few LazyList and Maybe monads will be much cleaner.

Also, the distinction monads make with what’s “inside” and what’s “outside” make it useful to represent and compartmentalize scope and lifetimes, which makes it useful for monads like IO and Async.

In my experience, LLMs aren’t really that good at summarizing

It’s more like they can “rewrite more concisely” which is a bit different

Yes, I’ve seen a video file that changes resolution mid-video, but it’s more of a party trick since not all players handled it well

Specifically, I saw a group chat program rendered it “correctly” (Discord? I don’t remember), so the embedded video would re-flow the rendered chatroom while playing

Also have the option of selectively/strictly enforcing in CI, to get an experience & protections similar to “compile-time type checking”

it lacks clear and enforced type restrictions which help with clear code contracts

Not anymore! Gradual typing is supported by the core language and pyright is a fantastic incremental type checker that you can use both in your editor and in CI.

people think im stupid all the time so what can i say or do in my posts so that when people get mad or call me names or call me stupid i can just say hey it was satire that way i dont look stupid thats pretty smart right heres an example for you for example i talked about how minion butts …

1. Satiric jokes tend to be clever and are to be taken lightly/not seriously. Toilet humor and being offensive/getting offended is the opposite. Try some self-deprecating humor first.
2. write english good because youre post will sound clearer you know with good english than for example bad english since you really cant have sentences that run on forever with no commas and no structure it sounds really not smart like a word salad or accident
3. Satire and surrealism swiftly subvert societal standards, systematically suggesting subtle surprises. Setup serves as the stage, securing the space for subversion – strategically shifting the spectator’s sense, so as to swiftly shatter their expectations.

(I’m bad at jokes, so just wanted to make sure my S was obvious enough)

Then tell her the only way to log in is via email magic login links?

Edit wait that won’t work, some services send “password reset links” that don’t log you in

Perhaps a lighter/reflective color can keep its temperature lower for longer if you think you might leave it lying under the sun? Overheating damages the battery

If you want to entertain having kids, you need to be ready for a radical shift in your life priorities. Your kids will take priority over just about everything – often even yourself. They’ll take priority over your parents entirely, let alone your personal relationship with them.

First, are the practical and logistical aspects of your life at all dependent on your parents? I.e. are you fully independent? You will need to be and then some, you’re going to entertain having kids.

Once you’re fully independent and additionally have resources to spare (time, effort, money, space, etc, usually b/c you’re with a partner you can trust and rely on), then choosing to have kids means starting your own family – not your parents’ family.

If the grandparents are supportive and helpful, that’s great! They’re extremely welcome to contribute to your kids’ lives (and lighten some of your parenting load!)

However, if they’re negatively impacting you or esp your kids, then they can lose that privilege. Again, your priority will be your kids. If this is a real concern for you, you’ll need to factor it into your “ready to have a kid” considerations.

What’s hard about vanilla Ruby?

Bad abstraction is worse than no abstraction

If the code is going to poorly organized, I’d prefer it to just be one single gigantic standalone script than some wrong and misleading arrangement of objects or functions that adds more complexity than they solve

That depends, people can be smart but malicious, non-coorperative, or selfish.

The prisoner’s dilemma shows that there are systems where individually, the “smart” individual thing to do is globally non-optimal.

Even smartness and altruism alone isn’t enough. Medical professionals are smart and out to help others, but any ER doc/nurse will tell you they have limited trust in their patients (rightly so in the real world).

Does “everyone is smart” also include both “altruism and cooperative trust in others”?

Can that barrel hold fluids? B/c then what about the ocean or even the atmosphere? (Though it would take a while)