@pjh while slavery is a terrible thing, I find some of their advice page on it questionable.
Unusual travel times
They may be dropped off / collected for work on a regular basis either very early or late at night.
What about someone who commutes to London? That qualifies as both in most cases...
Reluctant to seek help
Victims may avoid eye contact, appear frightened or hesitant to talk to strangers and fear law enforcers for many reasons, such as not knowing who to trust or where to get help, fear of deportation, fear of violence to them or their family.
Or they could be a software developer, who is at least marginally socially awkward. Or autistic. Or, on the 'hesitant to talk to strangers' front, they could just be British.
Well, developers who commute to London are slaves, aren’t they?
why does "string == int" convert both sides of the equation to int instead of string?
I come up against this occasionally in SQL. I try to write my code with the correct data types so I never rely on implicit conversion (and dates are always given an explicit format, I never expect to know how to parse the default format); but my colleagues are not always so careful, leading to cases where a process that has worked up until now fails with the "invalid number" error, because someone was checking whether the first character of the phone number string was 1 or 4 to work out how to format it, and then some user put non-numeric text in the phone number field. I modified the query to check instead for the first character being '1' or '4'.
Phone numbers are NOT integers. They are arbitrary strings of a specific set of characters. You can't do anything meaningful on them using arithmetic operators.
@blek My first was a real Model M w/buckling springs, followed by a Unicomp one with USB (for use at home, so my coworkers didn't beat me to death with it). The CODE keyboard was my first "modern" mechanical keyboard, though.
I probably won't make any hardware changes until the NBN arrives at our place (although... I should try to find how how long they expect it to be, I guess), so I've bookmarked this for future reference.
Oh, I don't actually have a problem with OOP, or even OOP languages, as such - I am quite fond of Python and what little I've seen of Ruby isn't bad, and I even have a certain fondness for Smalltalk even if I never really got a solid grip on it.
FWIW, the surface of Python and Ruby both look pretty decent, but they've got yawning pits of beneath. Especially Ruby.
I don't really know Ruby internals, but I have to agree that a lot of Python's internals are kludges - clever kludges, sometimes, but often really bizarre and ugly ones. Also, it's true that there are plenty of kludges in the libraries and other programmer-facing parts as well. OTOH, I would be hard pressed to think of a language where that wasn't true. In the end, Python fits the way my mind works pretty well, which I guess is what matters when it comes to preferences in languages.
Mind you, just because I don't love Java doesn't mean I wouldn't work in it; once your in a job, you do what they ask you to, or you don't take the job. You might debate the topic with them, and recommend something else, but you rarely get to choose except by deciding whether to take the position or not. My problem with my last job was that they changed their minds after six months, and switched to doing everything on SnailFarts, a platform that made me want to claw my eyes out.
Do those makefiles include macros in them that dynamically create makefile rules? I hate those; they're so hard to debug…
Well, yeah, that's a pile of in it's own right to be sure, but I was referring to the 'required leading tabs' horseshit. Supposedly, the original developer of make noticed the problem early on, but decided that he didn't want to risk fixing it because he had a whole ten users already and he didn't want to break their existing scripts.
It is worth bearing in mind that he never expected to have many more users, because Unix was some obscure thing that was thrown together on a lark and would never get used outside of Bell Labs. He just didn't see it as mattering, because it would be replaced in a few months time anyway - his cobbled-together copy of a relatively minor Tenex utility just wasn't important enough to piss of those ten guys down the hall.
@greybeard What sort of password is ******* There's no entropy there whatsoever!
My first attempts at breaking into computers were when I was in primary school and our school got its first PC. Probably Win3.1, but maybe 95.
There was a login screen which asked for a password and I noticed that whatever I typed it just showed a *. I decided that logically, that meant it was reading the * as well, and that all I had to try was *, **, *** etc.
Once I got past about 10 characters I started to realise that I might have missed something
Discovering the Higgs Boson required 5,000 qualified physicists. And they each deserve credit.
Which is what they got in the shit tons of other papers that were published around the main one. Not all of them did work that, in any other project than the LHC, would have gotten them a paper in a prestigious journal. They get the credit that they deserve in the publications related to the work that they did, and they get referenced in the summary paper that lists the overall results. Having them as authors of that paper is pointless and may even be harmful to other people. That is absolutely zero good reason for doing it.
Ok, I'm willing to concede on that point. If they are citing separate papers from different projects and listing those people as authors of this paper, then I agree that's silly.
OTOH, if those authors did direct work on both the referenced paper and this one, then my position stands. And I still don't find 5,000 people directly involved in this paper finding the equivalent of a needle in a Virgo-supercluster-sized haystack to be all that far-fetched.
Oh cry me a river. Next thing you'll tell me snobby professors at Oxford won't look at UCL candidates.
You still have no idea how the academic world works, do you? The publication list and citation index is not just some weird uni-peen. It is what is used to evaluate people.
And I'm saying that if it's solely what's used to evaluate people, then that is what needs to change. Because no matter what, different people are going to have different roles in a research paper, whether it's 10 people or 5,000 people.
Wait... you're telling me that you're upset that a project you're involved in is unfairly limiting their selection of co-authors on their paper, and now you're hypocritically saying that means the LHC should do the same to their work? Do you even hear yourself right now?
Wot?? TDEMSYR. Did I ever say anything about a project I might be involved in and how that hypothetical project is limiting co-authors in an hypothetically unfair way??
My apologies. I thought the quote you were replying to in that chain was what you said and not who you were responding to.
(1) You probably know her as the goddess Fortuna, or even her modern incarnation, Lady Luck. She did smile on me about one legendary weapon, but it wasn't Rodgort.
Those of us who are fond of the works of Terry Pratchett will tend to think of her as The Lady, and will fervently hope she looks away from us.
Indeed. That thought was, indeed, on my mind as well, but I prefer not to even think about her. I read what the Great Man wrote about her, and a practice of mostly ignoring her existence seems best. You have to acknowledge her existence, but you don't have to pay much attention to it. More to the point, you have to not pay much attention to it.
This is my log. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
My log is my best friend. It is my life. I must master it as I must master my life.
Without me, my log is useless. Without my log, I am useless.
@tsaukpaetra DOIs are “easy” to read: 10.14989 indicates the publisher, and 139379 the individual item. The link resolves to a metadata page and links from there to the actual content (depending on a bunch of conditions). The big difference from a normal URL is in what happens later: DOIs will continue to resolve for a long time, even past the publisher changing how it internally arranges their files or the publisher going bust, as there are agreements with repository institutions (e.g., Library of Congress) to keep them going, and will even survive if we stop using HTTP and HTTPS and so on.
Properly a DOI is a URN and not a URL: doi:10.14989/139379. The service dx.doi.org is nothing like as important, but provides a simple way to do the resolution with current browsers.
Holy crap Google is watching the forums like a hawk!
According to Avast, the database where the CCleaner hackers were collecting data from infected hosts ran out of space and was deleted on September 12, meaning information on previous victims is now lost to investigators and the number of computers infected with the second-stage backdoor payloads...
That sounds like 'some from column A, some from column B'.
On the one hand, yeah, the server should be able to negotiate the version of HTTP, or degrade to the long-standing HTTP/1.1 if the client doesn't handle HTTP/2, or at the very least give a meaningful error message that says, "Whoops, this only works with HTTP/2, sorry". That's a , but not the big one here.
A brand-new version of iOS not supporting HTTP/2? Now that is a major .