This is one of the reasons I love AI. It enables you to write security vulnerabilities at inhuman speed!

Wow, that is an insanely impressive engineering feat. Stuff like this is why I still love the internet. Thank you for sharing it!

I’m surprised no one has mentioned hobby horsing yet.

https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

Have fun! :)

Also, do you remember what platform you saw it on?

Kimiko: 👇🤟☝️👉🫴🫳🤚👋🤛

Tell me why my dumb ass read the title as “Constructing a Horse Mortality Pie” and then nearly threw up looking at the pictures…

Me after beating

only to immediately lose all my rosaries in

and then spending the next 3 hours barely failing to

As someone who likes the difficulty of Hollow Knight and Silksong (despite being pretty bad at the game), I think the best point in the video is that it would be really nice to give the player options. I would still play on the hard setting, but there are friends I have who would love exploring the map and seeing all the amazing art, but I can’t recommend the game to them because I know they’d be super frustrated within an hour or two.

This is kind of an odd take imo. FOSS is important because it doesn’t matter who the creators or maintainers are. Even if all of the people OP listed were in that room and agreed to write backdoors into their software for the government, others could just fork those projects and the community could move on without the bad actors. (I know that’s easier said than done, but it is feasible.)

I’m not about to start cheering for Richard Stallman just because he’s not MAGA. He had some pretty bad takes about the Epstein scandal.

What a quarter century of watching companies incorrectly implement “agile” software development does to a MF.

Oh, nice! Thanks for explaining that. I didn’t realize there was a way to run a cluster without HA.

I’m not sure how well that works if the cluster is only designed to be temporary, since removing a productive node from a cluster is a bit risky

Good callout. Just did some reading on the concept of maintaining a quorum, which I didn’t know about. Definitely need to be careful if I go with that approach, but it does sound interesting! I’m not entirely opposed to leaving the old laptop as a node and then using it for experimental stuff or maybe running just one specific standalone service on it after moving the critical stuff to the new server.

Sounds pretty straightforward. Thanks for the info!

That’s a fair point, but I kind of want to tinker around on the laptop without worrying too much about breaking things and figure out what all I actually want to self-host. That will help me figure out what sort of hardware I need.

While I understand the sentiment, I don’t feel like that’s a particularly fresh revelation… If anything, I was surprised at the handful of dissenting voices on the right. Even before this latest wave of Epstein news, I was willing to bet Trump could just straight up admit to pedophilia and still wouldn’t lose much of his base.

This is a genuine question: What do people get out of reading “both sides” (or all sides) of editorialized news? Specifically compared to just reading the facts of the situation.

I’ve been reading almost exclusively AP News for years (and occasionally listening to NPR), and I really like getting the details of whatever just happened (or is currently happening) without too much of a spin or a “take” on it. I can use the primary sources from the article and then form my own opinions.

It’s been awhile since I’ve done much reading from other sources. I used to like NYT, but not so much recently. I don’t really feel like I’m missing much other than the occasional deep dive investigative journalism piece, so I’m curious what other people are getting out of it.

It should have never gotten through code review, but the senior devs were themselves overloaded with work

Ngl, as much as I dislike AI, I think this is really the bigger issue. Hiring a junior and then merging his contributions without code reviewing is a disaster waiting to happen with or without AI.

That’s fair, but my point is that the NYT headline/article seems to be so simplified that it almost becomes contradictory. For example, you quoted this bit

The agency took the unusual step of creating websites debunking the conspiracy theory that chemicals are being sprayed in the sky to control the weather or do other things.

But later in the article it also says

The chief executive of Rainmaker, Augustus Doricko, has said that while the company released silver iodide into a pair of clouds on July 2, the mission led to less than half a centimeter of rain falling on drought-stricken farmland

So there is a company that is effectively “spraying chemicals in the sky” with the express intent of “leading to rain falling”. Again, I realize that is very different from the “chemtrail” conspiracy theory, but that nuance could have been handled so much better.

I much prefer the phrasing of the AP article’s headline that I linked earlier: “No, weather modification did not cause the deadly flash floods in Texas.”