I almost spit out my coffee from this meme!

This is being purposefully obtuse. Choosing to force users to memorize a recovery code increases the likelihood of lock outs.

There is a real risk of account lockout, especially for those of us who travel frequently. Lockouts are a significant risk when you need to carry all your belongings and devices.

There are also some of us who also think about what happens to us when we are incapacitated and a loved one needs access to our passwords. In a situation, it’s important to balance security vs expediency to access critical information. This new policy disrupts that.

At the very least, I wish Bitwarden would have given us more time to force this policy. I have to scramble to make changes to my estate planning documents and get in contact with my lawyer to change my advanced healthcare directives.

One of my favorite achievements from a space agency. I hope we can return back to the Saturnian system with more landing probes!

Then create one venv for everything

This is a classic piece, and I love the contradictions in the text. It encapsulates my feelings on good software and code that it almost becomes an art than a science.

What a wild ride! Can’t believe it’s been ten years.

PSA for Debian Testing users: read the wiki

https://wiki.debian.org/DebianTesting

Control-F security returns 18 results. This is well known and there’s even instructions on how to get faster updates in testing if you want.

Took me a sec.

Thanks for sharing. We use all pytest-style tests using pytest fixtures. I’ll keep my eyes open for memory issues when we test upgrading to python 3.12+.

Very helpful info!

I’m most excited about the new REPL. I’m going to push for 3.13 upgrade as soon as we can (hipefully early next year). I’ve messed around with rc1 and the REPL is great.

Do you know why pytest was taking up so much RAM? We are also on 3.11 and I’m probably going to wait until 3.13 is useable for us.

EOL for 3.8 is coming up in a few short weeks!

So cool!! Mercury is definitely the most mysterious inner planet due to its difficulty to get a space probe there even though it’s the closest planet.

The spacecraft will arrive next year, and I can’t wait for all the Science it will uncover!

TIL this exists

I also like the POSIX “seconds since 1970” standard, but I feel that should only be used in RAM when performing operations (time differences in timers etc.). It irks me when it’s used for serialising to text/JSON/XML/CSV.

I’ve seen bugs where programmers tried to represent date in epoch time in seconds or milliseconds in json. So something like “pay date” would be presented by a timestamp, and would get off-by-one errors because whatever time library the programmer was using would do time zone conversions on a timestamp then truncate the date portion.

If the programmer used ISO 8601 style formatting, I don’t think they would have included the timepart and the bug could have been avoided.

Use dates when you need dates and timestamps when you need timestamps!

Do you use it? When?

Parquet is really used for big data batch data processing. It’s columnar-based file format and is optimized for large, aggregation queries. It’s non-human readable so you need a library like apache arrow to read/write to it.

I would use parquet in the following circumstances (or combination of circumstances):

• The data is very large
• I’m integrating this into an analytical query engine (Presto, etc.)
• I’m transporting data that needs to land in an analytical data warehouse (Snowflake, BigQuery, etc.)
• Consumed by data scientists, machine learning engineers, or other data engineers

Since the data is columnar-based, doing queries like select sum(sales) from revenue is much cheaper and faster if the underlying data is in parquet than csv.

The big advantage of csv is that it’s more portable. csv as a data file format has been around forever, so it is used in a lot of places where parquet can’t be used.

Wow everyone seems to love P3 but I actually liked P4 better. I mean I really enjoyed both, but P4 was a more immersive experience for me. I should reboot my vita and play it again.

I really felt like P4 had deeper connections and relationships between the characters. It felt more real, and that made the tension in the game more exciting. I love every second of it and am still trying to find a game like it.

Don’t get me wrong, P3 was great also. The gameplay was superb and the characters were all great. But P4 still has a special place in my heart.

The autocomplete is nice but I don’t find it a game-changer. The comment about writing tests is on point though, but that’s the only place I found out useful.

They’re asking for TV manufacturers to block a VPN app in the TV. Not to block VPN in general.

Dude, if you’re being obtuse on purpose because you have an ax to grind against Rust, try a different approach. You’re not getting anywhere, clearly by the fact that no one agrees with you.

If you don’t like that Rust has a restricted trademark, then call that out instead of trying to label the software and it’s license as non-free. It’s literally called out in my source that name restrictions ipso facto does not violate freedom 3.

But if you genuinely believe that the implementation of the Rust language and it’s trademark is burdensome to create a fork, and you want people to believe you, then you gotta bring receipts. Remember, the benchmark that we both quoted is that it “effectively hampers you from releasing your changes”. It being “not a piece of cake” doesn’t cut it.

Hint: Google Rust forks since their existence also undermines your claim.

Good luck.

Please read this and try again.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html#packaging

Rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable, if they don’t substantively limit your freedom to release modified versions, or your freedom to make and use modified versions privately. Thus, it is acceptable for the license to require that you change the name of the modified version, remove a logo, or identify your modifications as yours. As long as these requirements are not so burdensome that they effectively hamper you from releasing your changes, they are acceptable; you’re already making other changes to the program, so you won’t have trouble making a few more.