I both love and hate this so much. The performance and recording is incredible but any super tech nerdy parody just causes me immense internal cringe. I couldn’t make it more than a third of the way through that and I love working with K8S.

Absolutely the best kind of space crashloopbackoff.

So what it’s really like is only having to do half the work?

If it’s automating the interesting problem solving side of things and leaving just debugging code that one isn’t familiar with, I really don’t see value to humanity in such use cases. That’s really just making debugging more time consuming and removing the majority of fulfilling work in development (in ways that are likely harder to maintain and may be subject to future legal action for license violations). Better to let it do things that it actually does well and keep engaged programmers.

You’re talking the talk but are you walking the walk? Are you out actively engaging in the tactics that you’re apparently advocating? Or are you just participating in anti-electoralism/accelerationism, hoping that wins for the far-right, contrary to history, result in anything but increased suffering and mass murder?

Unrelated, good screenname :)

Oh, they do. There have been lawsuits. Why would the company want to lose a paying customer?

The main problem here: commercial dating apps are not intended to help people find partners or flings. They are intended to make the companies money. Some may initially be functional but enshitification hits them fast, once they have a userbase established.

I’ve taken to just using HTTPS only. No redirect. Just an error.

It also prevents use of education to enforce class divisions.

Part of that is because private education there is not a thing. So some of the funds that would go to for-profit education at the expense of public schools instead goes into taxes to more efficiently fund education.

Yeah… It’s weird but I find it useful that it is, in a weird way. Treating it as an uncertainty means that one MUST explicitly check all pointers for nil as part of normal practice. This avoids NPEs.

Everyone’s brains are different. For some SSRIs might work. For others, SNRIs. While there are claims of cocaine and prostitutes being helpful for some, that’s not really scientifically proven and there the significant health and imprisonment risks. There is, however, strong evidence for certain psychedelics.

TL;DR - Drugs might be helpful for some.

People are animals.

Money doesn’t buy happiness but it can help someone who is struggling to meet their basic needs not get stuck in a depressive state. Plus, it can be used in exchange for goods and services that show efficacy against depression.

Kinda. nil is a weird value in Go, not quite the same as null or None in JS and Python, respectively. A nil value may or may not be typed and it may or may not be comparable to similar or different types. There is logical consistency to where these scenarios can be hit but it is pretty convoluted and much safer, with fewer footguns to check for nil values before comparison.

I’m other words, in Go (nil == nil) || (nil != nil), depending on the underlaying types. One can always check if a variable has a nil value but may not be able to compare variables if one or more have a nil value. Therefore, it is best to first check for nil values to protect against errors that failure to execute comparisons might cause (anything from incorrect outcome to panic).

ETA: Here’s some examples

// this is always possible for a variable that may have a nil value. 
a != nil || a == nil

a = nil
b = nil
// This may or may not be valid, depending on the underlying types.
a != b || a == b

// Better practice for safety is to check for nil first
if a != nil && b != nil {
    if a == b {
        fmt.Println("equal")
    } else {
        fmt.Println("not equal")
    }
} else {
    fmt.Println("a and/or b is nil and may not be comparable")
}

Oh my. Yeah. I don’t Windows except to test tools so, that’s not surprising.

I’d say use WSLv2, myself.

Hey now. It’s all about perspective. If you think about it in terms of geological history or the history of the universe, the discovery pretty much just happened.

IIRC, a nil value can be checked against a literal successfully but not against another nil value. Say you want to check for equality of two vars that could be nil. You just need an extra if statement to ensure that you are not trying to compare nil and nil or nil and a non-nil value (that’ll give you a type error or NPE):

var a *string
var b *string

...
if a != nil && b != nil {
  if a == b {
    fmt.Println("Party!")
  } else {
    fmt.Println("Also Party!")
}

You’d first check for nil values, then compare like normal. Extra step, yes, but it keeps you from hitting NPEs through that route.