cashewchoo

I think it's very fair and valid for you to feel however you want with regards to shelter-in-place/wfh/lockdown, but to me it seems somewhat unconscionable to be smug like enjoying your time alone is a huge win against extroverts.

I feel like it's a pretty ridiculous over-statement to say that introverts feel like they're in a pandemic normally. I'm an introvert and don't feel like that. I suspect the only people who could reasonably feel like that are people with anxiety disorders or phobias.

I don't know, I'm not saying you can't express your opinion or feel how you feel. But I want to express I'm a bit grossed out reading your post, as you seem just a bit too gleeful and smug at this whole situation.

A federal reserve police force would open some interesting additional avenues for affecting interest rates outside of open market operations...

(this is a joke)

Maybe I'll change my tune when I hit 30, but we had Aerons at my $lastjob and while I liked it well enough, I now work from home in what is essentially a Lazy Boy welded onto rolling wheels, and it cost rather less.

I do have a sit/stand desk now too though, so whenever I feel like I've been sitting for too long I switch to standing for about 30 minutes. Maybe that helps too?

I'm not, your ellipses abbreviate too much. I'm seeing, among a group of people who would theoretically be predisposed to not want to stay at home, people still electing to stay at home. This contradicts the OP's glib remark that less women nowadays want to stay at home.

I know this is bait, but I want to provide my experience as counter-example.

I went to a STEM college where anyone who graduates could quite reasonably expect to be able to build themselves a middle-class career, live comfortably, and perhaps even have some economic mobility (moving from middle-class to upper-middle, mainly...).

There weren't a lot of women there, and you would expect that what women were there would be disproportionately the kind of woman who would be interested in having a life-long career.

Just anecdotally, looking at peers who graduated with me, that is not the case. Many are married, and many have chosen to end their careers (where finances allow) to stay at home.

If anything, I would argue the main failing we've committed upon the young generation (regardless of gender) is to provide them an economic framework wherein more than a single-digit percent of wage earners can hope to raise a family on a single income.

In my experience, there are a growing number of men who wish they could be stay-at-home dads if finances permitted.

But instead, most households are dual-income out of necessity.

And beyond that, we've also demonized living with your parents pretty thoroughly, so people are hesitant to save money and get free childcare by living with their extended family.

Something else I want to mention is how poorly we've tailored the current world to making raising a family easier. Letting your kids go further than your lawn unsupervised is tantamount to child abuse now. Childcare is absurdly expensive, low-quality, low-availability (enrollment is headcount-capacity-limited in most places) and low-flexibility (many places either want your full-time enrollment or not at all. You can't just pick some days).

And we've also demonstrated that we're, as a system, willing to totally f** over parents when disasters strike. Covid has been a total disaster for dual-income families with children. I've heard it was not uncommon for it to be "lucky" a partner was laid off because otherwise they would've had to quit, without unemployment benefits, to care for kids full-time.

Anyway, my point is, we've made it really fucking inconvenient to have kids and now there's all this overly-simplistic sexist whinging from a certain segment of the population about how it's somehow all the fault of young women. It's disgusting both from a moral standpoint and in how intellectually lazy it is.

The thing is, if you didn't integrate Stripe, you'd either be:

1. integrating someone else who does roughly the same thing as Stripe 2. integrating with and maintaining 100's of individual payment methods and countries, and dealing with tons of entities and managing relationships with them.

You might be able to cheat if you just do visa cards and only in the US, or something. But that is dramatically less than what you're getting when you integrate Stripe.

It punishes smaller transactions unfairly, which doesn't make a lot of sense since the size of the dollar amount probably doesn't have anything to do with the incremental cost to stripe to compute the tax bill.

It's worth noting that there's the interchange fees that come along with using a credit card in the US aren't just a pure profit rake for the credit card companies.

It obviously pays for computing resources and staffing and such, but beyond that it also, roughly, pays for all the fraud that happens with any credit card. In many cases, when someone does a fraud, it's someone "in the middle" (i.e. not the fraudster, the card holder, or the merchant) who ends up holding the bag.

It's also paying for some aggregate amount of credit risk that card users pose to their banks.

Credit card fees are high because fraud is such a colossal problem, and at various levels it's better for institutions to just eat costs (and thus slightly raise the minimum viable price they can charge for processing) than make it harder for people to buy things.

Ah, so nothing technical.

[I don't do Android, but, ] isn't Google trying to kinda pivot to Kotlin?

I did a 6 to 8 migration at $lastjob. The upgrade was smooth except for 2 issues:

* It exposed a kernel panic bug in our Linux kernel when Hadoop applications de-allocated huge amounts of RAM at once (e.g. a Spark program with a 100GB heap exiting suddenly would panic the system)

* It introduced a weird UI behavior change in Swing in one of our desktop apps. In fairness, whoever wrote the app first did some weird unnecessary shit with JComboBoxes, but it was still somewhat odd to me that the behavior changed. The bug was like, when previously if you clicked a box it'd swap it out for a JComboBox that had the previous content of the non-combobox-view-thingy that was in its place. On 8, for some reason it would always be blank and discard the old content. Don't quote me on this description, though. It was a while ago and it was a weird interaction regardless.

So, idk. It's always something. Software, eh?

Where does the article mention a website-blocking system? I'm curious as to the technical details. I'm sure it'll work this time.

"For Canada to have an innovative and flourishing digital economy, we must protect copyright online"

Hrmph. Citation required.

Anyway, I'm not sure why businesses are so concerned about copyright still. Maybe this is specific to Canada? But country-specific things aside:

* The DMCA already makes it easy enough to keep things like KickAssTorrents offline, which was honestly the closest I've seen to a good tracker going mainstream.

* Steam has already shown how to "best" piracy to the extent that a business can. It's not via copyright laws. Everyone thought rampant piracy would mean Steam won't work in Russia. That aged well.

* Actually combating piracy on a technical level suffers greatly from the 80/20 rule. You can eliminate 80% of the piracy with 20% of the effort. But getting that last 20% is going to take 1000% of the remaining 80% of the work. (Sorry, yes, that was an attempt at a joke). It's basically not going to happen. Look at how well things like optical media DRM have gone. Look at how streaming DRM is going. Look at how hard it is for even *China* to stop its people from accessing free information online, much less normal countries with normal amounts of human rights abuses stop people from getting downloads of whatever Disney's latest remake is.

Dunno. As much as I hate copyright, and as much as I love free culture, it's hard for me to get too interested or worried about stuff like this nowadays, from a legal realism standpoint.

Confession: For a long time I didn't really think movements like these were necessary. "Why does it have to be for group X? Why not just have it open to everyone?" I still see a lot of sentiment like that on the internet. I felt like they were themselves racist.

I've slowly come around. I understand now why things like this program aren't racist, why they exist, and why the people they target can uniquely benefit from outreach. Moreover, I don't think I understand enough the struggles that underrepresented groups go through, and the fact that I'm oblivious to them is part of my own privileged upbringing (white, male, middle class, suburbs, nuclear family, single income, etc).

I think I still have a long ways to go, and one thing I've been thinking about is how I can try to capture the worldview that I used to have while I was in the "this isn't a problem, stop posting about it/i'm tired of reading about it" camp and thus use it to explain to people who are still stuck in it. The only reason I think I came to understand is because a dear friend of mine gradually explained it to me in a way that I understood.

Anyway, while I was writing this, lots of low-quality comments have come and been deleted, so I feel like it's worth hitting post. I can't eloquently and convincingly articulate why things like this are needed yet, especially to an already-convinced-otherwise audience, but maybe someone else can.

Legacy uses and a smattering of personal preference.

Perl was hugely productive in its day, when alternatives were either non-existent or extremely nascent (Python and Ruby) or things like C, C++, Java, or Bash. You can probably imagine how writing Perl was fun for script-y tasks when compared to doing it in those languages. So, it has a large legacy presence and isn't going anywhere.

Plus there's a few people for whom it is muscle memory, and IME muscle memory can easily beat out language niceness/appropriateness for productivity in personal things.

Disclaimer: I was born in the early 90's so I was learning long division during Perl's glory days. My perspective is mostly from working in a large Perl codebase that was born in those years and talking with the people who chose Perl for said codebase.

I think the difference is that he's directing his question to us, and not to the person in question?

I think it's fair, in this day and age, to ask if there's corroborating evidence for the contents of a tweet/article.

Sea Lioning, I think, is a lot more about antagonizing/bullying a victim who is speaking up about about whatever act victimized them, while disguising your bullying as being a good-faith investigation into their claims. When it's actually in bad faith, and your intent is primarily to increase the "cost" to victims of bringing forth their complaints.