PureParadigm

Your feelings are shared by many others our age. Friends at work are important, especially if you're living alone. I live alone in a city with friends within reach, but only having friends outside of work is not enough social interaction for me.

Consider how much social time there is in high school and college. There was barely a moment to be alone. Classes are full of discussion, meals are eaten together, and shooting the shit with siblings or roommates fills in all the other time. If you forego social interaction during work hours, I don't see how the math adds up to get back to the baseline from high school and college.

It sounds like you have an office to go to even though your team doesn't come in often. This is the case for me too, but luckily I'm at a big enough company where there are people my age on other teams. At first, barely anyone came in, but someone has to break the deadlock so I kept coming in every day regardless. Fast forward a year and there is a group of 20-somethings that come in every day. I've formed some of the best friendships of my life here. I recommend going into the office every day even if it's going to be empty. It's a good routine anyway to get out of the house.

While I don't have any personally, I'd also recommend housemates. A lot of my friends from work have housemates and I feel like it's an easy way to build a large friend group since you can share each other's friends. It especially seems to help those who are new to the city and don't have a friend group yet. Your housemates can also easily become your friends!

I really sympathize with your situation. You're simply asking for what used to be normal to return. Don't lose hope - there are so many of us like you and we just need to find each other.

I do the same. I've yet to hear a convincing argument against this practice. Everyone seems okay with passwordless docker and you can use that to privilege escalate too.

> The problem is that ligature substitution is “dumb” in the sense that it only considers whether certain characters appear in a certain order. It’s not aware of the semantic context.

In many code editors (even my terminal with fish shell!) this is not true. Ligatures are broken up when the text changes style due to syntax highlighting. Syntax highlighting can consider context, so if there is a mistaken ligature, this can be fixed by changing the syntax highlighting rules.

Actually, it is how it works. Try doing "cd ~camgunz" and it should take you to the home directory for camgunz.

Using Pdfsandwich in college was like having a superpower. We would often be given PDFs with only image data. While my peers were still scrolling through and copying quotes by hand, I was there in seconds with Ctrl-F to find and copy/paste.

Once you have text in the PDF, you can use any sort of text analysis tools. You can use tools to convert it to plain text and grep through, or anything else you want.

That being said, it's not perfect, but still pretty awesome. Sometimes the spacing was off or it would confuse symbols like 1, I, or l. But these are minor and usually only on poorly scanned PDFs.

I wanted to clear out my account so I deleted the VM but it didn't delete the associated static IP, so I got charged for the unused IP address that month. I didn't know the IP was still around until I got the bill. If this were in Azure I would have deleted the entire resource group and the IP would have gone along with it.

In Azure I put all my stuff in a new resource group and then when I'm done I just delete the entire resource group. This has worked well for me so far and I haven't had any surprise charges like I did on AWS and Digital Ocean.

The key takeaway for me is how this decision affects port scanning. According to the article:

> Van Buren is really good news for port scanning, for example: so long as the computer is open to the public, you don’t have to worry about the conditions for use to scan the port.

As a frequent user of nmap, this is good to hear.

The bigger problem is when platforms block the content. In this case very few people will hear about the conspiracy theory. So then few will know that this is something worth investigating. This dramatically hinders research into the (potentially true) conspiracy theory.

I have less of a problem with marking things as unfounded if they are actually unfounded. I wouldn't use the term misleading because not all unfounded claims are false. There's still a lot of gray area here. Maybe the person in charge of making those judgements is not a subject matter expert. Or maybe the person making the claim has some additional information that cannot be revealed. (Perhaps they are inside the organization and cannot leak too much or they will be caught.)

I would set the bar for marking things as misleading as requiring evidence to the contrary. I think it is fine to mark things as lacking evidence, as long as that can be established fairly and reliably. I have my doubts that this can be done reliably, but as long as there is no blocking occurring, I think the harm of a mistake is minimized. Anyone claiming to be an impartial subject matter expert capable of making these judgements should provide evidence of that claim.

Some conspiracy theories turn out to be true. Suppressing research into these would also lead to poorly informed decisions. For example, government mass surveillance on the scale revealed by Snowden was considered a conspiracy theory before the proof emerged.

So I would disagree that "conspiracy theories are problematic." Some are problematic, but there are also some that turn out to be extremely important. No progress is made without questioning authority and the status quo.