terlisimo

speedcrunch is wonderful but I had this pet peeve with it where it had a hardcoded limit of 5 digits before it drops to scientific notation. Not very useful for shell scripts and programming.

I opened an issue while it was on bitbucket, but the response was something "yeah, that's intentional".

I see they bumped it to 14 digits now.

for years I've had a custom build of it with

src/math/hmath.cpp:

- if (expd > 5) + if (expd > 25)

blessed be the open source!

well...

1) GoL is turing complete

2) there are algorithms that calculate digits of Pi or e.

so... yes?

but if I just took any old Pi-digits algorithm and encoded it on GoL, its appearance would not be meaningful or "elegant" to our senses. You're probably asking "what does the shortest/most elegant program to calculate Pi in GoL look like, and does it maybe have some unexpected relation to other mathematical terms like, I dunno, Euler's identity or... Mandelbrot set?" And then you would probably need to answer the question "Well, how would you like the digits encoded and represented?".

All of a sudden your question becomes a bit ambiguous. Or did I misunderstand what you meant?

I mean.... I think I feel what you're asking, like... is there some primal version of Pi that can be encoded in GoL initial condition with as few bits as possible but I'm afraid that the answer is something like "well, that depends on what you mean by [...]"

One step closer to Managed Democracy.

It's an idea from a video game where AI is spying on your life 24/7 and infers who you would vote for so you never actually need to (or can) vote.

why not solve it with bash then, just put

#!/path/to/your/venv/bin/python

as first the line of your script, done/done

I hear ya, that sounds familiar.

The amount of deliberate damage anyone on my team can do is pretty much catastrophic. But we accept this as risk. It is appropriate for the environment. If we were running a bank, it would be inappropriate, but we're not running a bank.

I pushed back on risk management one time when The New Guy rebuilt our CI system. It was great, all bells and whistles and tests, except now deploying a change took 5 minutes. Same for rolling back a change. I said "Dude, this used to take 20 seconds. If I made a mistake I would know, and fix it in 20 seconds. Now we have all these tests which still allow me to cause total outage, but now it takes 10 minutes to fix it." He did make it faster in the end :)

The abbreviated story I told was perhaps more dramatic-sounding than it really played out. I didn't just say "Nothing." mic drop walk out :)

The client was satisfied after we owned the mistake, explained that we have a number of measures in place for preventing various mistakes, and that making a test for this particular one doesn't make sense. Like, nothing will prevent me from creating a cron job that does "rm -rf * .o". But lights will start flashing and fixing that kind of blunder won't take long.

I agree.

I didn't want to add a wall of text for context :) And that was the only time I've said something like that to a client. I was not being confrontational, just telling them how it is.

I suppose my point was that there's a cost associated with increasing reliability, sometimes it's just not worth paying it. And that people will usually appreciate candor rather than vague promises or hand-wavy explanations.

A personal anecdote:

One of my guys made a mistake while deploying some config changes to Production and caused a short outage for a Client.

There's a post-incident meeting and the client asks "what are we going to do to prevent this from happening in the future?" - probably wanting to tick some meeting boxes.

My response: "Nothing. We're not going to do anything."

The entire room (incl. my side) looks at me. What do I mean, "Nothing?!?".

I said something like "Look, people make mistakes. This is the first time that this kind of mistake had happened. I could tell people to double-check everything, but then everything will be done twice as slowly. Inventing new policies based on a one-off like this feels like an overreaction to me. For now I'd prefer to close this one as human error - wontfix. If we see a pattern of mistakes being made then we can talk about taking steps to prevent them."

In the end the conceded that yeah, the outage wasn't so bad and what I said made sense. Felt a bit proud for pushing back :)

Honorable mention of ATI Radeon 9600 that was soft-upgradeable (via hacked drivers) to 9800 PRO for a 200% perf boost. Good times.

Apparently not.

In my first attempt I've actually deleted the directories altogether but later wanted to scan a system manually and I couldn't repair the installation and get WD to run again.

I've tried once but windows tries really hard not to let you do that.

My Windows kung-fu is rusty these days so the Linux method seemed neater.

My preferred way of disabling Windows Defender is to boot Linux, mount windows partition and rename windows defender directories to *.disabled or whatever.

Example (assuming it is mounted at /mnt/ntfs):

mv "/mnt/ntfs/Program Files/Windows Defender" "/mnt/ntfs/Program Files/Windows Defender.disabled"

mv "/mnt/ntfs/Program Files (x86)/Windows Defender" "/mnt/ntfs/Program Files (x86)/Windows Defender.disabled"

mv "/mnt/ntfs/ProgramData/Microsoft/Windows Defender" "/mnt/ntfs/ProgramData/Microsoft/Windows Defender.disabled"

Antivirus service fails to start and that's about it, no other side effects.

To revert just rename back.

I have dual boot set up, but I believe the Ubuntu USB install image supports NTFS.