BWStearns

It's mostly just annoying (for now). If you travel a lot it can amount to a couple hours extra per trip if you're unlucky.

But the bad part is that it's extrajudicial punishment/retaliation for protected speech. She hasn't been accused of anything that she can mount a defense against, so why is the government retaliating against what is presumably legal behavior? It's presumably legal because she hasn't been indicted for anything or notified of a pending indictment.

If the justification ends up being that they've marked you as a "domestic terrorist" for exercising your first amendment rights then why are they letting you travel at all? Are they going to give you random secondary every time you travel? Will they let you move your money out of the country? Why would they? After all, you're now a terrorist (but apparently not worth arresting).

> when to know it’s time to replace my synchronous inter service http requests with a queue

I've found that once it's inconveniently long for a synchronous client side request, it's less about the performance or metrics and more about reasoning. Some things are queue shaped, or async job shaped. The worker -> main app communication pattern can even remain sync http calls or not (like callback based or something), but if you have something that has high variance in timing or is a background thing then just kick it off to workers.

I'd also say start simple and only go to Kafka or some other high dev-time overhead solution when you start seeing Redis/Rabbit stop being sufficient. Odds are you can make the simple solution work.

Anyone have any good literature on alert fatigue as a general concept in design?

> Some 9/11 attackers were CIA assets and protected from FBI/police scrutiny as such

Citation seriously needed. This is untrue unless the words you are using are not to be understood in any sense common to English speakers. The most generous fact based interpretation I can give it is that Saudi financiers were underscrutinized for political reasons, resulting in missed opportunities to stop the attacks. The actual attackers were not CIA nor FBI assets.

> I consider [having a big benefit at 100% vs an 80/20 rule] a characteristic of type systems in general; a type system that you can rely on is vastly more useful than a type system you can almost rely on, and it doesn’t take much “almost” to greatly diminish the utility of a given type system.

This! This is why I don't particularly care for gradual typing in languages like Python. It's a lot of extra overhead but you still can't really rely on it for much. Typescript types are just barely over the hump in terms of being "always" enough reliable to really lean on it.

It was a big miss calling them "prompt engineers" and not robopsychologists.

I wonder if lunar space elevators might be the fix here. If I understand correctly, such an elevator would not be as subject to the perturbations since the tension would keep it's orbit stable (is it still an orbit if it's tethered?).

Another option might be a LORAN style system put up on towers. With lower gravity and no atmosphere I imagine we could stick transmitters up very high without super complex construction, maybe even just a giant carbon fiber tube with a transmitter at the top.

What if we make it accomplish 20% less but spend 10% more money?

Thanks for the clarification. I expected it worked like that but couldn't find it spelled out after a brief perusal of the docs.

I have file A that's in two places and I run this.

I modify A_0. Does this modify A_1 as well or just kind of reify the new state of A_0 while leaving A_1 untouched?