I linked an article with commentary, yes. When I read the original comment myself I was very put off by the tone/apparent attitude toward the subject. I still think it was an innocuous change they could have merged – I would’ve. I think the author of Ladybird is probably not a misogynist, but to be so blunt and dismissive on that PR was a questionable look IMO.
He’s probably a nice guy ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
The founder of Ladybird said some questionable stuff that he walked back. You be the judge: https://text.tchncs.de/latenightblog/ladybird-browser-and-drama
[Brendan Eich, founder of Brave made a] 2008 donation of $1,000 to California Proposition 8, which called for the banning of same-sex marriage in California,[18]and donations in the amount of $2,100 to Proposition 8 supporter Tom McClintockbetween 2008 and 2010.
It also has optional ads to pay you in crypto. I view 99% of crypto as a scam btw
This is hilarious
asyncio.run(easy_peasy())
That’s fair! Takes time to get used to. Modern editors make this easier by highlighting the current indent level, or can even make the top X lines of the current closure “stick” to the top of the editor for those really long blocks.
Correct, I linked the source of the quote. My implication is the general idea is applicable here. Is python one of these languages where it is idiomatic to nest code deeply?
Flat is better than nested.
From the python I have seen and written, deep nesting is avoided.
Just curious, what about spaces made it hard? What language would have been easier? In curly brace languages, 99% of the time, a curly brace is followed by a line break and an indent. Python is similar except it’s typically a colon, line break, then indent.
What I have learned is: If the code is indented too deeply, it’s a code problem, not the language.
Torvalds infamously wrote:
“… if you need more than 3 levels of indentation, you’re screwed anyway, and should fix your program.”
The butts are also soft and fibrous
I have never heard this having married a Nutmegger (CT) from them or their family. I’ve actually never heard this from anyone ever in my life! The way I’m reading it, I can for some reason only hear it in a heavy Southern drawl, like MS or AL? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Or they dump their entire 6gb SQL database, customer info and all, into a SQL file that you have to load into a mariadb docker container when you just needed a subset that you were going to turn into csv anyway ☺️
Pandas supports lazy loading and can read files in chunks. Hell, even regular ole Python doesn’t need to read the whole file at once with csv
You are already (fat and fluffy) ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
This is such a weird non sequitur – what?
This is the coolest thing I have ever heard
Hold down j and lmk how smooth it is 😅
I mean, it should be clear. Smooth and fast and snappy. If you don’t want that, use neovim like me :)
I think that you have a well-reasoned and valid view. It’s not that I regret my birth, but that I didn’t consent to being a living, conscious thing – the consent portion of which you can reasonably view as an impossibility.
Suffering is a necessity of living, and therefore bringing a person into the world means they will suffer. You’re right that I generally take a utilitarian view of things, upon reflection. Though, taking it to its most extreme conclusion, I could never be asked to choose between saving 5 million people if it meant killing 4,999,999. Such thought experiments leave me confounded.
Maybe it’s the case we’re faced with infinite impossible choices because the universe doesn’t care and tends towards entropy. There is likely no perfect answer. All I can do as a person is try to beget as little pain into world as possible, but I recognize that my view isn’t without flaw or applicable to everyone everywhere all the time.
This is also why I don’t simply despise people who have children, like my own parents.
I appreciate you taking the time to explore this with me! Genuinely much food for thought.
I say that it’s actually impossible to answer, except in the most extreme cases.
It’s certainly impossible to answer in a single broad stroke for everyone, but that doesn’t mean it’s not useful or relevant to think about.
That is because the question was about rights, not consent.
If that’s so, then we’re talking past one another. My point is that in my ethical framework, having a child is wrong. They are incapable of consenting as you point out, which is part of why I view it as wrong.
Existence is a presupposition to consent.
Why? The child surely exists before, during, and after its birth. Can’t it be that the unborn human is incapable of consent rather than creating a paradox? I understand the chicken-and-egg problem you are describing, but I think it’s incomplete. As a fully functioning human being now, if I look back at my birth, did I consent? Did I exist yet? I think I can say simply, “No, I did not consent to being born.” Whether you ascribe a negative, positive, or neutral value to this is up to you. In my opinion, it’s immoral.
In what way is that different to negotiation?
It isn’t. I don’t think we disagree on this
But birth is a natural result of conception.
Yes, however isn’t this logic used to argue against abortion? I’d argue that a person becomes a full “person” at birth, which is perhaps arbitrary, but we have to define that point somewhere. Regardless of when we say a person “exists”, they still cannot consent regardless.
That all said, is anti-natalism completely correct for everyone? I don’t know. I’m sure our species going extinct would create lots of suffering for the dwindling population. Maybe on average, humans do not regret their existence. Does that mean it’s moral to make more conscious beings who are capable of feeling that regret?
Big unicode doesn’t want you to know this one simple trick