llccbb

Has tox matured into a usable system? I last tried it about two years ago and had too many problems with setting it up to suggest it to friends. Looking for a good non-centralized encrypted video chat.

This article discusses the benefits of having a 'pure hobby' that you perform for personal enjoyment (not necessarily to turn a profit). Whether your chosen employment enables you to purchase a home (as a single individual?) seems completely tangential to the point of the article. I rent and have non-hustle hobbies. They give me something to do during my evenings and an outlet for personal expression. Also the results of my hobbies are usually suitable as gifts to friends and family. I am not trying to monetize them for the same reason as what is mentioned in the article: the hobby becomes work; stress increases & enjoyment goes down; you lose the positive influence the hobby had on your life.

There will always be capitalistic and opportunistic people who view every moment of their life in the framework of "how can I profit off this situation?". Those hustlers aren't going away. The flip side is there are also people who recognize the value of internal alignment and seek that instead of capital/wealth growth.

The insecurity of many of the popular package managers (pypi, npm, crates) and the wholesale reliance of so many software systems on these managers seems like a massive security risk. While I appreciate the simplicity of getting an up to date environment through these managers, I always have a tinge of fear in using them. Whether it is backdoors, information theft (like this article), or filesystem destruction, they all are simple to implement and simple to hide. I let so much arbitrary code run on my computer when I import a python module. Maybe the breach isn't in a popular top-level library, but some dumb little dependency. It's even more dangerous because most eyes aren't looking at that dependency, presumably.

I am tremendously naive to infosec and security in general, but I can predict that the big companies have measures in place to mitigate these risks. Containerization seems like it could help limit the scope of the damage, but the popular containers seem like they are more at risk (usually downloading the latest releases) to encounter these attacks.

What is the likelihood that some actors (state-sponsored or otherwise) could bring down some major systems? Not Google/Facebook/Visa/Netflix major, but widespread across many smaller platforms.

Blackhats and Whitehats out there must be collecting information on:

Which dependencies/libraries could be targeted

Which authors/publishers are vulnerable (regarding password safety, lib deployment mechanisms, ...)

Which systems/libs to compromise to affect classes of targets

I feel like this is a likely cyber attack vector over the next 10 years. How haven't there been more of these that are successful? Is someone building the intelligence in preparation for attacking? Are these systems actually secure (if you successfully avoid maliceful users)?

Had a similar thought, but around C++.

auto types and lambda functions are the ones that come to my mind. I am sure there are more features making their way into modern C++ versions.

>> Robinhood rockets to a $5.6B valuation with a massive new funding round

The runaway effects are exactly the concern. Check out research on methane clathrates in the Mesozoic. Methane is 24x as potent a GHG than CO2.

When you see the gas flares in hydrocarbon production fields it may look like a waste (it is), but it has to be done because the alternative of releasing methane into the atmosphere is worse.

It looks like this isn't FOSS ($50 for a single website per year). The hosting structure is the same (self-hosted/you are on your own). Compared to Matomo this seems to work on SQLite in addition to MySQL.

Legitimate, non-cynical, non-opportunistic question. Will this boost Twitter's monthly active users?

What does this mean for "opposites attract" and "my better half"? Many substantial, long-term, fulfilling relationships are mutual partnerships where each person grows and as a couple find things that are "theirs" while filling critical roles for each other.

Fine-grained matches might not be that great. What will one have to learn from a relationship? What new interests will be developed? I know that FB's sociologists and ML experts have been considering these aspects more than I, but I fear the continued segregation and viewpoint-reinforcement that FB and algorithmic association sites subtly (or invisibly) are forcing upon society.

The problem is also around people artificially liking and commenting on your own posts (if they are public). I had encountered this last year when I was running a photography project and I would have to deal with fake accounts posting on every image. Each would post one of the following messages: 'Nice! Check out my page!', 'Wow! Cool pic. Want to increase your followers, click the link in my profile.", "Very nice. Follow back".

I don't want that spam in my image comments (considering there would only be 1 or 2 comments from real people and 10+ of these). I had to go through and manually delete them, block the users (achieving nothing because there are so many of these spammers).

This is a serious UX problem that has turned me away from Instagram (which was the "best social media" platform before they destroyed the chronologic timeline). I don't care if people are using an API to post legitimate content (I would have loved the ability to post content to multiple sites at once (twitter, IG, ...)). I care when the API enables annoying spammers.

I agree with your point that there should be some baked in capability for a more comprehensive check on the HTTP response. There are probably some edge cases around this regarding stream=True (load header only, not content) and iter_content() which pulls chunks from a buffer so the entire content isn't loaded into memory at once. Probably surmountable.

FWIW Response.status_code is an int, so it might need to be a member function on Response.

I am confused about the test used here. The `requests` docs very plainly state that `Response.ok` only checks the status code. Looking into the codebase proves that as well. Is there a status code for "I am going to send bad-length content"?

This might be a UX problem and not a technical one. The author seems to think that `Response.ok` should be an all-purpose check.