WTF Bites
-
@dkf it just further confirms my theory that @pie_flavor is a lich, an undead creature of pure evil.
-
-
@dkf it just further confirms my theory that @pie_flavor is a lich, an undead creature of pure evil.
Hey now, let's not go give liches a bad name by connecting them to Raku. That'd just be uncalled for.
-
75 years of experience with Raku
That's roughly the amount of experience you need to figure out how to quote strings correctly.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in WTF Bites:
Status: Due (I think) to how SVN repositories are constructed, there is no easy way to obliterate large commits from the repo except to filter it and re-create it with the filtered commits out.
Holy shit.
Define, "obliterate." Like, you want them out because someone checked in sensitive information?
-
@boomzilla said in WTF Bites:
@Tsaukpaetra said in WTF Bites:
Status: Due (I think) to how SVN repositories are constructed, there is no easy way to obliterate large commits from the repo except to filter it and re-create it with the filtered commits out.
Holy shit.
Define, "obliterate." Like, you want them out because someone checked in sensitive information?
I want them out because they compose of >300 GB of blob data that shouldn't have been checked in.
-
@topspin I have 30 years of experience in Scala, as documented in the two topics I've created.
I'm guessing that @pie_flavor now has 75 years of experience with Raku, just from trying to run a few basic scripts and writing it up for our enjoyment.
And he can keep 'em!
-
WTF of my day: So someone asked about wearing helmets for bicycles and if the Hövding was any good (it's basically an airbag instead of a normal helmet - which has several advantages (e.g. the buffer zone is way bigger) and, of course, some disadvantages - it's expensive, one-time (though you'll get a rebate if you have to replace one) and you have to trust the software to recognize relevant cases)
Someone else promptly replied that he had seen a video of a test where this system failed. Since I have extensively researched that topic and have not seen such a video, I promptly asked for the source. Which he provided.
Said source cannot be really called a "test" in what anyone else would understand under that term.
First of all, no relevant data is mentioned - speed of impact? Version of the Hövding (they're at MK3 now and there are firmware updates to boot)?
Then there's the type of scenario: It's a frontal impact of the bike against the high side of a car seemingly without braking. Basically: "Bike drives against wall" Again, no other scenarios are considered, also, no mention of why they chose this particular one which is very uncommon. Of course they also didn't offer any data on how often this scenario occurs.
Lastly, no comparisons: What happens to someone without a helmet? What happens to someone with a normal helmet?
In short: Rubbish.
But, of course, the guy had to defend his video, stating that this could happen with trucks and big vans!
Only problem: The video used a normal car, neither trucks nor vans were used. Also, the "usual" way this scenario plays out with an actual truck would be that you'd find yourself under the truck - which does happen, yes, but would also be the singular case where a regular helmet does fuck all.
-
On the other hand:
-
their demo video shows a guy on a bike wearing their device instead of a traditional helmet. That seems like a Bad Idea™. Cars that have air bags also have safety belts, and using both is either recommended, or mandatory (depending on your country).
-
apparently this thing uses a Bluetooth connection to your phone. Are we really, really sure the device is safe even if their app or servers get hacked? Knowing what passes for "security" in the context of IoT devices, I'd be a bit worried.
-
-
@Zerosquare said in WTF Bites:
apparently this thing uses a Bluetooth connection to your phone.
I have hard enough time sending photos over Bluetooth. I'm never going to trust that technology for anything safety-related.
-
@izzion article links to:
https://twitter.com/lrb23/status/1282040894812610560It's obvious the 28yo doesn't have 17 years of experience, but why mention Tim Berners-Lee in 2012? That seems to imply he didn't invent the web until after 1995 but he did 1990-ish.
-
Went to Slashdot (yes, I know, that's TRWTF) and got this from Firefox:
So, their certificate expired 6 weeks ago, and I've gone there several times during those 6 weeks, but Firefox is just now complaining about it?
-
Went to Slashdot (yes, I know, that's TRWTF) and got this from Firefox:
So, their certificate expired 6 weeks ago, and I've gone there several times during those 6 weeks, but Firefox is just now complaining about it?
Of they accidentally a configuration and the last-known good one was one that has a certificate that expired six weeks ago.
-
@Zerosquare said in WTF Bites:
Are we really, really sure the device is safe even if their app or servers get hacked?
Don't worry. That would only be a problem while the Bluetooth connection is working, so it's very unlikely to ever happen.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in WTF Bites:
Went to Slashdot (yes, I know, that's TRWTF) and got this from Firefox:
So, their certificate expired 6 weeks ago, and I've gone there several times during those 6 weeks, but Firefox is just now complaining about it?
Of they accidentally a configuration and the last-known good one was one that has a certificate that expired six weeks ago.
-
it's expensive, one-time
As I understand it, helmets should be considered single use anyway since the shock-absorbing foam is only effective against one impact.
-
@PleegWat
Definitely ... I once made a surprise close up inspection of the state of the road surface and at first inspection the helmet appeared ok, no external damage not even a scratch but looking closer you could see some small cracks and dents in the 'foam' part.
-
@PleegWat I heard of a special model of motorbike helmet that had aroma capsules inside it so after one hit, the capsules would crack and the helmet would smell like rotten eggs to dissuade people from using it further.
-
As I understand it, helmets should be considered single use anyway since the shock-absorbing foam is only effective against one impact.
Yeah, that's the recommendation, though how much of that is 'it really won't protect you second time' and how much is 'it's impossible to quantify the safety margins when it has unknown damage' I'm not sure.
They're not compulsory here in the UK and I rate my chances of not having an accident as being good enough to not justify the faff, so I'm no expert.
-
@bobjanova said in WTF Bites:
As I understand it, helmets should be considered single use anyway since the shock-absorbing foam is only effective against one impact.
Yeah, that's the recommendation, though how much of that is 'it really won't protect you second time' and how much is 'it's impossible to quantify the safety margins when it has unknown damage' I'm not sure.
They're not compulsory here in the UK and I rate my chances of not having an accident as being good enough to not justify the faff, so I'm no expert.
Helmets for normal bikes are not mandatory here either, but the same applies to motorcycle helmets as well.
I believe scientific consensus here is that wearing a bicycle helmet causes more risk through increased recklessness than they prevent through protection. This may be influenced by NL having a lot of dedicated bicycle infrastructure - a bike on a separated bike lane is a lot less likely to run into a car than one on the main road.
-
@PleegWat The doctors in the ER dealing with bike accidents would likely have very choice words for those "scientists".
-
@Rhywden I was trying to google up the guy who proved with statistics that increased safety doesn't reduce the overall number of deaths due to humsn psychology, but instead I found this:
Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma when jumping from aircraft: randomized controlled trial
Objective To determine if using a parachute prevents death or major traumatic injury when jumping from an aircraft. Design Randomized controlled trial. Setting Private or commercial aircraft between September 2017 and August 2018. Participants 92 aircraft passengers aged 18 and over were...
That said, @Rhywden, you're confusing the overall safety of an activity with the damage done to those who were already unlucky enough to have been involved in an accident. @PleegWat doesn't question the latter.
-
I believe scientific consensus here is that wearing a bicycle helmet causes more risk through increased recklessness than they prevent through protection. This may be influenced by NL having a lot of dedicated bicycle infrastructure - a bike on a separated bike lane is a lot less likely to run into a car than one on the main road.
It's one of these statistical things that you have to be very careful with. Helmets make people feel safer so they're more likely to be reckless, but they also make people actually safer so they're more likely to survive an accident and are more likely to not need medical intervention when an accident happens.
-
Helmets for normal bikes are not mandatory here either
Here helmets are mandatory for cyclists only.
-
@Rhywden I was trying to google up the guy who proved with statistics that increased safety doesn't reduce the overall number of deaths due to humsn psychology, but instead I found this:
Parachute use to prevent death and major trauma when jumping from aircraft: randomized controlled trial
Objective To determine if using a parachute prevents death or major traumatic injury when jumping from an aircraft. Design Randomized controlled trial. Setting Private or commercial aircraft between September 2017 and August 2018. Participants 92 aircraft passengers aged 18 and over were...
I've seen that before, probably on this forum. Still hilarious.
-
I can't believe that the single most common notification you will ever receive from MS Teams is "Someone mentioned General in General", yes no one, absolutely no one at the entire Microsoft thought that maybe some better wording could be invented.
I have never had that notification
-
On the other hand, the fact that Pijul's patches are always commutative […]
Actually, no, they are not.
:In Pijul, for any two patches A and B, either A and B commute, (in other words, A and B can be applied in any order), or A depends on B, or B depends on A.
Okay, have your
badge. Two patches are always either commutative or form linear history.In practice cherry-picks often require some manual wiggling, in which case Pijul (and Darcs) would simply consider the patches dependent and pull things you didn't want. While in other cases the patches are only dependent semantically, so Pijul (or Darcs) won't pull them together, but the result won't build, requiring manual intervention again. These make the patch algebra much less helpful in practice than it sounds.
Cherry-picking is very rarely needed compared to other VCS operations. And where Pijul's patch algebra really shines is merges. Because Pijul files are DAGs and not flat sequences, it is possible two commit a merge conflict, have two conflicting versions of a file coexist in the same revision, continue working on other parts of code and make further commits, and only then resolve that merge conflict. And the result will be identical to resolving the conflict right away. You can even commit your conflicts, push them, and let someone else take care of resolving them! The possibilities are endless. Darcs doesn't offer anything like that AFAIK.
That sounds awful
-
On the other hand, the fact that Pijul's patches are always commutative […]
Actually, no, they are not.
:In Pijul, for any two patches A and B, either A and B commute, (in other words, A and B can be applied in any order), or A depends on B, or B depends on A.
Okay, have your
badge. Two patches are always either commutative or form linear history.In practice cherry-picks often require some manual wiggling, in which case Pijul (and Darcs) would simply consider the patches dependent and pull things you didn't want. While in other cases the patches are only dependent semantically, so Pijul (or Darcs) won't pull them together, but the result won't build, requiring manual intervention again. These make the patch algebra much less helpful in practice than it sounds.
Cherry-picking is very rarely needed compared to other VCS operations. And where Pijul's patch algebra really shines is merges. Because Pijul files are DAGs and not flat sequences, it is possible two commit a merge conflict, have two conflicting versions of a file coexist in the same revision, continue working on other parts of code and make further commits, and only then resolve that merge conflict. And the result will be identical to resolving the conflict right away. You can even commit your conflicts, push them, and let someone else take care of resolving them! The possibilities are endless. Darcs doesn't offer anything like that AFAIK.
That sounds and
I think you accidentally a whole bunch of words.
-
@bobjanova said in WTF Bites:
As I understand it, helmets should be considered single use anyway since the shock-absorbing foam is only effective against one impact.
Yeah, that's the recommendation, though how much of that is 'it really won't protect you second time' and how much is 'it's impossible to quantify the safety margins when it has unknown damage' I'm not sure.
They're not compulsory here in the UK and I rate my chances of not having an accident as being good enough to not justify the faff, so I'm no expert.
Helmets protect the head by being made of materials that absorb the force, usually destructively to the materials in the helmet. Subsequent events, the helmet will not be as good at absorbing the force and more will be transferred to the skull and brain.
So while they might look fine there is a substantial risk that they will not do as good a job in more crashes in part because of fractures in the material, in part because the material is already compressed.
-
@dkf If bicyclists wear helmets, it can also make cycling appear as a dangerous activity, so that more people will choose to drive a car, causing more accidents between cars and pedestrians (because there are more cars) and between cars and bicyclists (because car drivers are less used to bicycles on the road).
-
@dkf If bicyclists wear helmets, it can also make cycling appear as a dangerous activity, so that more people will choose to drive a car, causing more accidents between cars and pedestrians (because there are more cars) and between cars and bicyclists (because car drivers are less used to bicycles on the road).
Yeah, that's one of those things you'd really need a good study on. Because psychology quite often isn't "A follows B". I'd be very careful making such claims.
Most of the times, it's simply a null effect, others it's actually an inverse correlation.
-
@dkf If bicyclists wear helmets, it can also make cycling appear as a dangerous activity, so that more people will choose to drive a car, causing more accidents between cars and pedestrians (because there are more cars) and between cars and bicyclists (because car drivers are less used to bicycles on the road).
Yeah, that's one of those things you'd really need a good study on. Because psychology quite often isn't "A follows B". I'd be very careful making such claims.
Most of the times, it's simply a null effect, others it's actually an inverse correlation.
What I heard was helmets make accidents more likely but serious injury less likely. I don't know if it mentioned the numbers.
An analogous situation would be flak helmets appearing more dangerous than no helmets because a shot that would outright kill someone with no helmet would instead be survivable with severe injuries
-
On the other hand, the fact that Pijul's patches are always commutative […]
Actually, no, they are not.
:In Pijul, for any two patches A and B, either A and B commute, (in other words, A and B can be applied in any order), or A depends on B, or B depends on A.
Okay, have your
badge. Two patches are always either commutative or form linear history.In practice cherry-picks often require some manual wiggling, in which case Pijul (and Darcs) would simply consider the patches dependent and pull things you didn't want. While in other cases the patches are only dependent semantically, so Pijul (or Darcs) won't pull them together, but the result won't build, requiring manual intervention again. These make the patch algebra much less helpful in practice than it sounds.
Cherry-picking is very rarely needed compared to other VCS operations. And where Pijul's patch algebra really shines is merges. Because Pijul files are DAGs and not flat sequences, it is possible two commit a merge conflict, have two conflicting versions of a file coexist in the same revision, continue working on other parts of code and make further commits, and only then resolve that merge conflict. And the result will be identical to resolving the conflict right away. You can even commit your conflicts, push them, and let someone else take care of resolving them! The possibilities are endless. Darcs doesn't offer anything like that AFAIK.
That sounds awful
I think you accidentally a whole bunch of words.
Stop editing my quotes
-
@Jaloopa anyway. Why do you think it's awful? Instead of botched merges that nobody is even going to notice, you get clearly marked merge-only commits that you can spot, review, and even selectively rollback without affecting any other modifications done. If you're worried about people abusing the great power their tools give them, Pijul gives them less opportunity to ruin your day than Git, not more.
-
Pijul gives them less opportunity to ruin your day than Git,
To be fair, so does a tactical nuke
It's probably just unfamiliarity or not fully understanding your explanation but it sounds hideously complicated with no clear reason why you'd want the extra weirdness
-
Look out! It's Outlook!
-
Pijul gives them less opportunity to ruin your day than Git,
To be fair, so does a tactical nuke
I'm all for using tactical nukes on bad devs.
It's probably just unfamiliarity or not fully understanding your explanation but it sounds hideously complicated with no clear reason why you'd want the extra weirdness
Let's hope this will be simpler:
Problem: You want to commit to a branch another person has modified, so you are forced to merge code you know nothing about before you can deliver your work.
Solution: Pijul.
Problem: Some idiot has fucked up conflict resolution when doing a huge merge, and undoing that will require significant effort because nobody remembers what was in conflict anymore and the diff of the merge commit is disgustingly enormous.
Solution: Pijul.
-
@Zerosquare said in WTF Bites:
apparently this thing uses a Bluetooth connection to your phone.
Are we really, really sure the device is safe even if their app or servers get hacked? Knowing what passes for "security" in the context of IoT devices, I'd be a bit worried.
-
-
@topspin Works fine IME but then I'm only using it for streaming music in the car.
-
@loopback0 said in WTF Bites:
@topspin Works fine IME but then I'm only using it for streaming music in the car.
If you're unlucky with the two stacks trying to talk, it's a complete mess, even with just music streaming.
-
@loopback0 said in WTF Bites:
@topspin Works fine IME but then I'm only using it for streaming music in the car.
Do you use it for navigation too? I've had a problem where my phone would stop the music for navigation prompts, but not say the prompt itself - but only over bluetooth; when I disconnected it was fine.
-
@loopback0 said in WTF Bites:
@topspin Works fine IME but then I'm only using it for streaming music in the car.
Do you use it for navigation too? I've had a problem where my phone would stop the music for navigation prompts, but not say the prompt itself - but only over bluetooth; when I disconnected it was fine.
I don't generally use my phone for navigation as it's built into the car but the odd time I've done so it's been fine.
-
It's a frontal impact of the bike against the high side of a car seemingly without braking. Basically: "Bike drives against wall" Again, no other scenarios are considered, also, no mention of why they chose this particular one which is very uncommon
I'd say that sounds pretty similar to a scenario where the car door is opened right in front of cyclist. (I don't know how common that is, but gut feeling says way more than what you mention.) I'll just keep my normal no software required helmet, thankx. Which is also useful for protecting against branches when on the mountain bike.
-
@PleegWat
Definitely ... I once made a surprise close up inspection of the state of the road surface and at first inspection the helmet appeared ok, no external damage not even a scratch but looking closer you could see some small cracks and dents in the 'foam' part.It's even more apparent when the shell is cracked too. Yes, BTDT. Several times.
-
@bobjanova said in WTF Bites:
They're not compulsory here in the UK and I rate my chances of not having an accident as being good enough to not justify the faff
I know my handing is good enough too. I trust my riding. I have zero trust in any cars around me. So, I'll wear my helmet every time I ride. (I was going straight, car passed me and turned right. I truly hope my bike scratched the fuck out of his car.)
-
I know my handing is good enough too. I trust my riding. I have zero trust in any cars around me. So, I'll wear my helmet every time I ride.
I started wearing one when I started doing more on-road riding for exactly this reason.
-
It's a frontal impact of the bike against the high side of a car seemingly without braking. Basically: "Bike drives against wall" Again, no other scenarios are considered, also, no mention of why they chose this particular one which is very uncommon
I'd say that sounds pretty similar to a scenario where the car door is opened right in front of cyclist. (I don't know how common that is, but gut feeling says way more than what you mention.) I'll just keep my normal no software required helmet, thankx. Which is also useful for protecting against branches when on the mountain bike.
Yeah, but "similar" is not the same as "identical" when it comes to collision tests. And can thus have wildly different outcomes.
edit: Finally found a study contracted through a Swedish insurance company which did proper tests and simulations:
But if you're using a "conventional" helmet, I'd strongly recommend a MIPS or WaveCel type.
-
Which is also useful for protecting against branches when on the mountain bike.
so much this ... I just this week had a serious encounter with a low hanging branch. It made a massive *tonk* sound.
Always wear protection during mountain biking: a helmet and goggles.wait ... always wear two protection items during mountain biking: a helmet, goggles and gloves
-
@loopback0 said in WTF Bites:
@topspin Works fine IME but then I'm only using it for streaming music in the car.
Do you use it for navigation too? I've had a problem where my phone would stop the music for navigation prompts, but not say the prompt itself - but only over bluetooth; when I disconnected it was fine.
I've used mine that way, and usually it works ok. It either turns down the volume or pauses, depending on if I'm listening to music or a podcast, then puts it back after it's done talking. But sometimes it'll fail to resume the podcast, at which point you have to put down your beer and fiddle with the phone to get it back
Why Pijul - The Pijul manual
