Anomandaris @ Anomandaris @kbin.social

Posts

5

Comments

91

Joined

2 yr. ago

Policies like that are about treating the addicts, not the distributors. I absolutely agree on that practice with regards to addicts, but we still need to go after the distributors of these lethal, destructive drugs.

Not sure that's true. Here's a US gov doc reporting on the Sinaloa drug cartel trafficking fentanyl.

The fentanyl crisis in America – fueled in large part by the Sinaloa cartel

From the link.

There's a really big difference between a college kid dealing weed to his friends and a fentanyl distributor. There are some substances you just can't allow to move freely through the country.

Are you aware of how little fentanyl it takes to kill someone? How badly heroin addiction changes people and ruins their lives? I am absolutely in favour of more lax rulings on recreational drugs, but not ones so completely destructive and destabilizing.

What? You expect the FDA to conduct raids on cartels trafficking fentanyl and heroin?

Honestly I don't get why this is so surprising, humans have been drawing graffiti for thousands of years. There's plenty of Ancient Roman graffiti to attest to that.

While yes, we should discourage it where possible, we also need to acknowledge that it's just as big a part of human nature, and culture, as the colosseum itself.

Burning it would release too many fumes, sink the bastard and turn it in to a new coral reef for marine life.

But that's functionally no different than what's already there...

The reason the lines are so long isn't because of anything Java related, it's because of the field names themselves.

That is an interesting point, but it's not Java specific, you could do this exact thing in most other languages and it would look pretty much the same.

Considering the fact that in a lot of enterprise projects the data structures are not necessarily open to change, how would you prevent reaching through objects like this?

This just tells me you don't use Java. Factory classes are just used to create objects in a standardized way, but this code isn't creating anything, it's just getting nested fields from already instantiated objects.

Sure, but most of the lines in the screenshot break down to:

object1.setA(object2.getX().getY().getZ().getI().getJ().getK().getE().getF(i).getG().toString())

Aside from creating a method inside the class (which you should probably do here in Java too) how would another language do this in a cleaner way?

If you honestly believe the standard, sterile, grandma-friendly, value-brand emojis typically available to mobile devices convey tone and response in the same way then nothing I could say would convince you otherwise.

That's not to mention the fact that non-mobile devices typically have no emoji keyboard available.

We unironically need these Twitch/pepe emotes to spread further, they're great for quickly and easily conveying a tone or emotion.

There's a massive range of these emotes that we're all missing out on... Madge

50% ad revenue says otherwise

One of the topics I've seen become more prevalent in recent years is the idea of limiting your use of privacy addons and softwares, with the aim of trying to prevent your fingerprint becoming too unique.

For example, there are probably a billion users with 21 inch monitors, running Windows 11, browsing on Google Chrome. Providing them with that information just makes you one more in the bunch, but if you stack up privacy addons you end up creating a more easily identifiable picture of yourself through the hole you created by hiding information.

Like most things, it's about balance. All changes to open source software must be approved by the community managing it, and if that community is lazy or poorly managed or simply too busy then there's an opportunity for new vulnerabilities to be created, either accidentally or maliciously.

But for well managed software, as other people have said you can get more changes more frequently, more security as many people are evaluating the code base, and greater attention to what users want rather than what's profitable. Whereas with closed source software there is a greater focus on profitability, and sometimes that leaves vulnerabilities open when development is rushed and/or vulnerabilities are not seen as important enough to justify the cost to fix, but sometimes that tendancy towards profitability can also ensure the product stays a market leader. Steam may be a good example of a good closed source product.

It would be interesting to see exactly how Meta is managing to block VPN users. Is it simply a matter of looking up instagram or facebook account related to email addresses used to sign up? Is it evaluating some sort of browser fingerprint? That's assuming VPN users are doing so via desktop, if it's an Android device for example is the OS itself providing information that's not getting obfuscated by the VPN?

That's fine, but what happens when this expands with the the increasing effects of climate change? What happens when Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas health insurance costs triple because of the risks of extreme heat? What about New Orleans or locations prone to extreme storms or hurricanes?

Huge patches of countries all over the world are soon to become uninsurable because climate change makes it too dangerous to live there.

This is the issue with the new "own nothing, subscription only" and "if you're not the customer, you're the product" type models. Everyone went to Threads to take a look at the brand new thing, but now everyone has seen the new thing they're gone.

All the hype that was built up initially based on that curiosity comes across as arrogance and empty promises as users inevitably get bored of the new shiny thing that's really just another attempt to harvest them for their metadata and ad-sense.

Time for America's newest game show! Are they a bought Russian asset, or are they just stupid? Stay tuned to find out!

I think "great" movie is kinda stretching it. It fails in authenticity from the first scene and proceeds to create more and more silly, unrealistic scenarios.

More spoilers below:

The opening scene is Driver's ship sounding an alert mere seconds before getting hit by asteroids (as if a ship capable of interstellar travel would be unable to see a cloud of rocks until it's about to hit), the autopilot is apparently unable to do anything so he climbs out of bed as his ship is disintegrating around him, and it becomes immediately clear he's about to crash in to the planet right next to his ship (as if the solar system were too crowded to plot any path beside skimming through Earth's atmosphere). It's complete nonsense, dramatic theatrical nonsense, but nonsense nonetheless.

There's plenty more examples of such nonsense, like giant dinosaurs killing a perfectly good meal and then ignoring it to chase two comparatively tiny humans. And other dinosaurs continuing a fruitless attack to their inevitable demise when any real animal would have run away long ago.