Although these approaches may differ, all of them concur onthree essential points:

Instead of weighing the balance of pleasure and pain,individuals tend to think about a good life in terms of their life beingmeaningful to them

Often, environmental and social analysts focus on threats, dangers,and damage. They highlight negatives, in terms of limited or non-renewable resources, or the impacts of excessive emissions or effuents.But what if one took the opposite approach and focused on the posi-tives that we want to strive for? We – the authors – believe that everyhuman being, that is you and us and everybody close and far away,wants to be able to live a good life, a life that is worth living. Giventhat the Earth’s resources are limited and distributed highly unevenly,the core objective has to be how everybody can live well within limits.

It requiresa deep and profound orientation toward the good life. It requires usto ponder what the good life is, what conditions must be fulflled forindividuals to live it, and what it takes to create these conditions.

By tying the question of limits to human needsand requirements for their satisfaction, they neither demand asceti-cism or renunciation, nor pursue unspecifed moral suasion in termsof “we should consume less.” Rather, they highlight the necessity –diffcult to pursue but rich in participatory rewards – to jointly defnethe conditions necessary to live a good life, and the subsequent stepsnecessary to make such a good life possible for all individuals. By pro-viding freedom to pursue the good life in an ecologically and sociallyfrayed world, these limits offer the beneft of ensuring that all otherindividuals living now and into the future can do so as well.

Justice in the context of consumption corridorsmeans that every person deserves access to a defned minimum level ofecological and social resources necessary to be able to live a good life,solely because they are a human being (what scholars call a natural-law-based perspective on justice).

Unless physical stature is of relevance in a conversation, simply using a person's name is appropriate.

In the new collection, The Good It Promises, The Harm It Does, activists and scholars address the deeper problems that EA poses to social justice efforts. Even when EA is pursued with what appears to be integrity, it damages social movements by asserting that it has top-down answers to complex, local problems, and promises to fund grass-roots organizations only if they can prove that they are effective on EA’s terms.

I am a developer, and we are developing the app for the customer, that will not publish through the google play store. But when we distribute the app to the customer, customer get that error. I want to avoid that alert of the Play stored.I want to understand, exactly which security concern has been break by my app.

There should thus be an option to give npm a list of vulnerability IDs (CVEs etc.) that it does not need to defend because the admin has decided it does not apply to their edge case.

Result of lots of searching on net is that pre-checkout hook in git is not implemented yet. The reason can be: There is no practical use. I do have a case It can be achieved by any other means. Please tell me how? Its too difficult to implement. I don't think this is a valid reason

The variable x initially has the type unknown: the type of all values. The predicate typeof x === "number" extracts dynamic information about the value bound to x, but the type-checker can exploit this information for static reasoning. In the body of the if statement the predicate is assumed to be true; therefore, it must be the case the value bound to x is a number. TypeScript exploits this information and narrows the type of x from unknown to number in the body of if statement.

This depends on the ruby code. Some projects will be semi-dormant due to various reasons. That's for us to address as a community. Are we going to let a single decade-old gem prevent us from moving Ruby forward? What's the threshold? There's libraries out there that don't work on Ruby 1.9. We left them behind or replaced them. And are people depending on a gem that's unmaintained really going to be the ones to jump on Ruby 3.0 the day after Christmas 2020? This is also still supposition. Name some gems that are unmaintained and in wide use. We can fix them! We have the technology! In my opinion, if matz's objective is to make the transition to ruby 3.0 simple, then it actually makes a lot of sense to postpone frozen strings by default. Postpone until when? 3.1? So then 3.1 will be the hard break? They've been discussed for what, ten years now? How long is long enough? We've added many ways for people to start transitioning to immutable literal strings, and people are using those mechanisms widely. We've pushed this transition a long time, and we still have another year until 3.0 is out and longer than that until people will need to make a move. What is the threshold for being "ready" to make this change? Unless we're planning to wait until Ruby 4.0 in 2030 to do this, I think we should do it now. I use frozen strings in most of my ruby projects, most of them set to true via the toplevel comment, so either way, it would not affect me. Exactly. Most people already do use frozen string literals. And adding a pragma means we can transition troublesome code to the new way with a single line per affected file. Heck, we can even add --enable:mutable-literal-string for people that are stuck with some of that old unmaintained code, allowing them to have a soft landing.

because most languages treat strings as immutable, which helps ensure you don't accidentally modify them and can improve performance. Fewer state changes in a program mean less complexity. It's better to opt-in to mutability after careful consideration rather than making everything mutable by default. What is immutability and why should I worry about it? may help.

If the client knows the access token expired, it skips to step (G); otherwise, it makes another protected resource request.

This larger perspective is offered by an analysis of citizenship and the common good. I begin with the idea of citizenship as being a practice entrusted with the preservation and conservation of the nexus of recognitional practices in a society. Then I move to the notion of the common good, interpreted not as a collective thing, a transcendent principle, or an abstract concept, but as the flourishing of the recognitional nexus itself. 

belongs_to does not ensure reference consistency, so depending on the use case, you might also need to add a database-level foreign key constraint on the reference column, like this: create_table :books do |t| t.belongs_to :author, foreign_key: true # ... end

class String alias strip_ws strip def strip chr=nil return self.strip_ws if chr.nil? self.gsub /^[#{Regexp.escape(chr)}]*|[#{Regexp.escape(chr)}]*$/, '' end end

That tends to be the biggest cop out excuse for libraries. Just do a major version release. The fact this library lies about the encodingis extremely problematic and causes numerous bugs. Any program currently using this library is already incorrect because of this behavior. Actually exposing the problem makes it easier for people to fix.

what do you think? Is Germany good for Indian students? To know more, read this article till the end.

It's usually undesirable to add a default scope. It will take more effort to work around and will cause more headaches. If you know you need a default scope, it's easy to add yourself .

I once had a cut on my arm. Someone asked me, is it serious? “It depends,” I replied, “on how much I scratch.”

Pleeaasse don't give "it" a name.There is no "it". You believers are part of the church in your location and you meet together.There is zero biblical precedent for a group of believers giving their particular group a name.I understand that nearly all believers do .... That in no way makes it right.Names seperate us from others of the church in our area.

has_scope :category do |controller, scope, value|  value != 'all' ? scope.by_category(value) : scope end

But anti- spam software often fetches all resources in mail header fields automatically, without any action by the user, and there is no mechanical way for a sender to tell whether a request was made automatically by anti-spam software or manually requested by a user. To prevent accidental unsubscriptions, senders return landing pages with a confirmation step to finish the unsubscribe request. A live user would recognize and act on this confirmation step, but an automated system would not. That makes the unsubscription process more complex than a single click.

The target of the POST action is the same as the one in the GET action for a manual unsubscription, so this is intended to allow the same server code to handle both.

subject { described_class.do_something }

I would like to understand this design then. In my experience it has only served to limit what I can achieve, and gained me no additional benefit.

You might notice that the “expires_in” property refers to the access token, not the refresh token. The expiration time of the refresh token is intentionally never communicated to the client. This is because the client has no actionable steps it can take even if it were able to know when the refresh token would expire.

For example, if I make an application (Client) that allows a user (Resource Owner) to make notes and save them as a repo in their GitHub account (Resource Server), then my application will need to access their GitHub data. It's not secure for the user to directly supply their GitHub username and password to my application and grant full access to the entire account. Instead, using OAuth 2.0, they can go through an authorization flow that will grant limited access to some resources based on a scope, and I will never have access to any other data or their password.

The Console now supports redeclaration of const statement, in addition to the existing let and class redeclarations. The inability to redeclare was a common annoyance for web developers who use the Console to experiment with new JavaScript code.

Honestly, at this point, I don't even know what tools I'm using, and which is responsible for what feature. Diving into the code of capybara and cucumber yields hundreds of lines of metaprogramming magic that somehow accretes into a testing framework. It's really making me loathe TDD despite my previous youthful enthusiasm.

Is the Client absolutely trusted with user credentials?

Which OAuth 2.0 Flow Should I Use?

Good commit hygiene is considered a best practice. GitLab should encourage and enable these kinds of best practices. This feature currently creates a problem and requires workarounds that remove information, or significant manual work.

To use a good book as a sedative is conspicuous waste.

Rebuilding the same Dockerfile should result in the same version of the image being packaged, even if the second build happens several versions later, or the build should fail outright, such that an inadvertent rebuild of a Dockerfile tagged as 0.1.0 doesn't end up containing 0.2.3.

Because the official images are intended to be learning tools for those new to Docker as well as the base images for advanced users to build their production releases, we review each proposed Dockerfile to ensure that it meets a minimum standard for quality and maintainability. While some of that standard is hard to define (due to subjectivity), as much as possible is defined here, while also adhering to the "Best Practices" where appropriate.

Why was the SIGSTOP-ed process not responding to SIGTERM? Why does the kernel keeps it in the same state? Why did it get killed the moment it received the SIGCONT signal? If it was because of the previous SIGTERM signal, where was it kept until the process resumed?

In other words, if you use Bash to run Jenkins, and then run docker stop, then Jenkins will never see the stop command!

Now, Bash actually does the same thing (reaping zombies), so you're probably wondering: why not use Bash as PID 1?

In other words, someone has to clean up after "irresponsible" parents that leave their children un-wait'ed, and that's PID 1's job.

Let's look at a concrete example. Suppose that your container contains a web server that runs a CGI script that's written in bash. The CGI script calls grep. Then the web server decides that the CGI script is taking too long and kills the script, but grep is not affected and keeps running. When grep finishes, it becomes a zombie and is adopted by the PID 1 (the web server). The web server doesn't know about grep, so it doesn't reap it, and the grep zombie stays in the system.

Glyph 0 must be assigned to a .notdef glyph. The .notdef glyph is very important for providing the user feedback that a glyph is not found in the font. This glyph should not be left without an outline as the user will only see what looks like a space if a glyph is missing and not be aware of the active font’s limitation.

Consider a text file containing the German word für (meaning 'for') in the ISO-8859-1 encoding (0x66 0xFC 0x72). This file is now opened with a text editor that assumes the input is UTF-8. The first and last byte are valid UTF-8 encodings of ASCII, but the middle byte (0xFC) is not a valid byte in UTF-8. Therefore, a text editor could replace this byte with the replacement character symbol to produce a valid string of Unicode code points. The whole string now displays like this: "f�r".

While there are many great answers regarding the "glyph not found" glyph, that won't help you actually detect it, as the text string in code will still have the character regardless of the font used to render it.

A glyph can also represent more than one character at once. Take an f_f_f ligature as an example. It represents three f characters in a row. Ligatures do not have Unicodes, because the separate characters already have codes and the the fact that it’s a ligature does not change the meaning of its parts.

Conversely, even before the mainstream began leeching off alternative cultures, the underground satirically appropriated from the mainstream.

The problem is that the caller may write yield instead of block.call. The code I have given is possible caller's code. Extended method definition in my library can be simplified to my code above. Client provides block passed to define_method (body of a method), so he/she can write there anything. Especially yield. I can write in documentation that yield simply does not work, but I am trying to avoid that, and make my library 100% compatible with Ruby (alow to use any language syntax, not only a subset).

You cannot use yield inside a define_method block. This is because blocks are captured by closures, observe: def hello define_singleton_method(:bye) { yield } end hello { puts "hello!" } bye { puts "bye!" } #=> "hello!"

grammar Parser { rule TOP { I <love> <lang> } token love { '♥' | love } token lang { < Raku Perl Rust Go Python Ruby > } } say Parser.parse: 'I ♥ Raku'; # OUTPUT: ｢I ♥ Raku｣ love => ｢♥｣ lang => ｢Raku｣ say Parser.parse: 'I love Perl'; # OUTPUT: ｢I love Perl｣ love => ｢love｣ lang => ｢Perl｣

It's really not always a better user experience to keep things in one browser... What if they are in a sign-up or check-out flow in your SPA, and at the last step they need to agree to some conditions in an external page? Unless you use a modal, opening in a new window would really be preferable to the user completely losing context and having to go through the whole process again.

def initialize_copy(original_animal) self.age = 0 super end def initialize_dup(original_animal) self.dna = generate_dna self.name = "A new name" super end def initialize_clone(original_animal) self.name = "#{original_animal.name} 2" super end

Are There Other Methods to Copy Something?

An interesting fact here is that Rails deliberately chose to override the #initialize_dup method instead of the #initialize_copy method. Why would it do that? Let's investigate.

I expect RuboCop to either make no suggestion on how to resolve the ambiguity, or to suggest something that does not change the semantics of the code as it stands.

However, the code as it stands associates the block with bar, and if the code is currently working, the programmer should definitely not parenthesize the parameter, because it would change the meaning of the code.

But this sounds like spreading fear and doubt when the Ruby parser has no such concepts :) {} always binds tightly to the call right next to it. This block {} will never go to using, unless it's rewritten as do ... end.

Rules formulated with openVALIDATION are thus at the same time a formal, machine-processable specification, but also a documentation that is easy for people to understand.

First, to clarify - what is "code", what is "data"? In this article, when I say "code", I mean something a human has written, that will be read by a machine (another program or hardware). When I say "data", I mean something a machine has written, that may be read by a machine, a human, or both. Therefore, a configuration file where you set logging.level = DEBUG is code, while virtual machine instructions emitted by a compiler are data. Of course, code is data, but I think this over-simplified view (humans write code, machines write data) will serve us best for now...

Why not use map, which we already have for collections? Generally speaking, the map function isn't just about collections (though that's usually how it's used in Ruby). map is more about putting an object in a context (a block in Ruby's case), modifying the object, and returning the modified object.

I don't know about you guys but I like dots on the second line when combined with indentation : # Example 1 one.two.three .four # Example 2 my_array.select { |str| str.size > 5 } .map { |str| str.downcase }

Is there a problem or not?If there is a problem, on which side is it? On the client or on the server side?

Code explains what and how Documentation explains why.

So make sure to write your documentation, but do not explain your spells.

The server possibly can send back a 406 (Not Acceptable) error code when unable to serve content in a matching language. However, such a behavior is rarely implemented for a better user experience, and servers often ignore the Accept-Language header in such cases.

without a schema, you do not have a spec, you have an aspiration.

Such schemas cannot easily be refactored without removing the benefits of sharing. Refactoring would require forking a local copy, which for schemas intended to be treated as an opaque validation interface with internal details that may change, eliminates the benefit of referencing a separately maintained schema in the first place.

JSON Schema allows for additionalProperties both a boolean or an object value. true is interpreted as "additional properties follow no restrictions", false means "no additional restrictions", and an object is interpreted as a JSON schema applied to the property values (the empty object is thus equivalent to true).

Prefer alias when aliasing methods in lexical class scope as the resolution of self in this context is also lexical, and it communicates clearly to the user that the indirection of your alias will not be altered at runtime or by any subclass unless made explicit.

But others, including Garner, believe, I think rightly, that while it can be ok to omit the hyphen in compound-noun adjectives, the better practice is to include the hyphen to ensure no confusion (especially since including the hyphen never triggers a miscue).

Weak sequencing reduces to a parallel merge when the operands are on different sets of participants. Weak sequencing reduces to strict sequencing when the operands work on the same participant.

I recommend using the term “parallel” when the simultaneous execution is assured or expected, and to use the term “concurrent” when it is uncertain or irrelevant if simultaneous execution will be employed.

Concurrency is about dealing with lots of things at once. Parallelism is about doing lots of things at once.

Concurrency means that an application is making progress on more than one task at the same time (concurrently)

Each commit should meet the following criteria: Have a well-written commit message. Has all tests passing when used on its own (e.g. when using git checkout SHA). Can be reverted on its own without also requiring the revert of commit that came before it. Is small enough that it can be reviewed in isolation in under 30 minutes or so.

I feel very happy about them indeed because they take me to the destinations they promise (they're all nouns). Login doesn't take me to my login, which makes me sad. It does take me to a place where I can log in, however.

"you can verb any noun". :) Though, comparing "ssh into a workstation" to "login to host.com", where "log in" exists, it's a bit like saying "entrance the building" when "enter the building" already works

OAuth, or Open Authorization is a protocol for users to authorize websites to access their information without handing over a password.

Following. I haven’t found anything in years. I’m planning on building my own scraper for my bank this winter if I can’t find anything by then

Since facts and narratives live in different universes, we should avoid mixing them carelessly. Crossing the boundary between the two universes should always be explicit. A narrative should not include copies of pieces of facts, but references to locations in a fact universe. And facts should not refer to narratives at all.

C, Fortran, BLAS, and Unix

I thought something like git rev-parse --abbrev-ref origin/HEAD would work, but that just seems to show what the default branch was of the repo it was cloned from, at the time of cloning, provided that the remote we cloned from was named origin.

When we have our git rev-parse examine our Git repository to view our origin/HEAD, what we see is whatever we have stored in this origin/HEAD. That need not match what is in their HEAD at this time. It might match! It might not.

There are many questions we can ask and answer about branch names. Each one is specific to one particular repository because all branch names are local to that particular repository. Any changes anyone makes in that repository affect only that one repository, at least at the time they make them.

Patrician IV is an overhauling upgrade to Patrician III; so if you have not played the previous games in the Patrician series, starting with IV is really all you need. Also, the game of Patrician is very straightforward and addicting, so playing previous versions won't offer you anything unseen in Patrician IV.

Let us briefly discuss three specific examples of concepts that seem particularly promising for theprospect of ‘good enough world’ and could become synergistically interrelated: (a) the social policy ofunconditional basic income, (b) the development of blockchains and (c) the idea of the offer networks

A Good Enough World

the Internet can potentially becomea backbone to a ‘global commons,’ an immense free space of information, products and services towhich everyone can contribute to and from which everyone can profit [51, 52 ].

The human takeover needs to be nonviolent and genuinely creative. It can augment the entirehuman social system not by resolving the gridlock of all the colliding identities and trajectoriesmentioned in Section 2 but by adding a lifeline for humans to hold on to whenever they considermaking a decision that challenges and disrupts; whenever they allow a new thought to take shape;whenever they genuinely feel the genuine need to say ‘no,’ or ‘yes,’ but today must say otherwise.

The ‘ideal’ is nothing other thana representation of social conditioning and the installation of a personware module into the newbornhuman that tries to accord what is with what the social system projects. We acknowledge of course thatsome mediation is always needed. The baby sees the world and the social world in particular throughthe eyes of the parent and only afterwards autonomously. This mediation is crucial to the cognitivedevelopment of the person and cannot happen without a personware. But the personware can beconstructed such that it empowers the individual and does not subjugate it to the social demands.

Here’s a quick blog post about a specific thing (making FactoryBot.lint more verbose) but actually, secretly, about a more general thing (taking advantage of Ruby’s flexibility to bend the universe to your will). Let’s start with the specific thing and then come back around to the general thing.

A more conservative workaround is find the gems that are causing issues and list them on the top of your Gemfile.

How much do we really need constants, anyway?

5.1 Recognize that 1) the biggest threat to good decision making is harmful emotions, and 2) decision making is a two-step process (first learning and then deciding).

1.2 Truth—or, more precisely, an accurate understanding of reality —is the essential foundation for any good outcome.

Stop autoclosing of PRs While the idea of cleaning up the the PRs list by nudging reviewers with the stale message and closing PRs that didn't got a review in time cloud work for the maintainers, in practice it discourages contributors to submit contributions. Keeping PRs open and not providing feedback also doesn't help with contributors motivation, so while I'm disabling this feature of the bot we still need to come up with a process that will help us to keep the number of PRs in check, but celebrate the work contributors already did instead of ignoring it, or dismissing in the form of a "stale" alerts, and automatically closing PRs.

Overriding the ActiveStorage controllers to add authentication or customize behavior is a bit tedious because it requires either: using custom routes, which means losing the nice url helpers provided by active storage copy pasting the routes in the application routes.rb, which is not very DRY.

now we talk i talk about a few ideas good regulators requisite variety self-organized criticality and then the 01:35:04 free energy principle from active inference um and uh maybe i'll just try to briefly talk mention what's what those means for what those ideas mean for people who 01:35:15 aren't familiar so good regulator really came from the good regular theorem or whatever it's called really came from cybernetics ash ashby yeah a lot his law of requisite 01:35:33 variety and uh the it's the concept is that a organism or a you know a system must be must be a model of that which it but 01:35:47 that needs to control

Embracing visions of a good life that go beyond those entailing high levels of material consumption is central to many pathways. Key drivers of the overexploitation of nature are the currently popular vision that a good life involves happiness generated through material consumption [leverage point 2] and the widely accepted notion that economic growth is the most important goal of society, with success based largely on income and demonstrated purchasing power (Brand & Wissen, 2012). However, as communities around the world show, a good quality of life can be achieved with significantly lower environmental impacts than is normal for many affluent social strata (Jackson, 2011; Røpke, 1999). Alternative relational conceptions of a good life with a lower material impact (i.e. those focusing on the quality and characteristics of human relationships, and harmonious relationships with non-human nature) might be promoted and sustained by political settings that provide the personal, material and social (interpersonal) conditions for a good life (such as infrastructure, access to health or anti-discrimination policies), while leaving to individuals the choice about their actual way of living (Jackson, 2011; Nussbaum, 2001, 2003). In particular, status or social recognition need not require high levels of consumption, even though in some societies, status is currently related to consumption (Røpke, 1999).

In this respect, relational notions of a good quality of life, such as ‘buen vivir’ from Latin America (D'Alisa, Demaria, & Kallis, 2014; Gudynas, 2011; Hopkins, 2008), may be key to achieving long-term sustainable outcomes

The dominant idea is one of attention, by which a representation at a position is computed as a weighted combination of representations from other positions. A common self-supervision objective in a transformer model is to mask out occasional words in a text. The model works out what word used to be there. It does this by calculating from each word position (including mask positions) vectors that represent a query, key, and value at that position. The query at a position is compared with the value at every position to calculate how much attention to pay to each position; based on this, a weighted average of the values at all positions is calculated. This operation is repeated many times at each level of the transformer neural net, and the resulting value is further manipulated through a fully connected neural net layer and through use of normalization layers and residual connections to produce a new vector for each word. This whole process is repeated many times, giving extra layers of depth to the transformer neural net. At the end, the representation above a mask position should capture the word that was there in the original text: for instance, committee as illustrated in Figure 1.

Kahler et al. (2011)and Kahler (2010) found that wild rice populations in lakes and rivers at the landscape scale tend to behighly distinct from one another and that the St. Louis River estuary may have its own “genetic identity”(Kern and Kahler 2014).

What's wrong with a simple, feel good movie?

Logically, if you just want a distinct list of event_id values, what order they occur in should be irrelevant. If order does matter, then you should add the start_time to the SELECT list so that there is context for the order.

The ORDER BY clause can only be applied after the DISTINCT has been applied. Since only the fields in the SELECT statement are taken into consideration for the DISTINCT operations, those are the only fields may be used in the ORDER BY.

1/ It fits into existing spec based testing infrastructure nicely, including running on travis, code coverage using SimpleCov, switching between generating a profile (RubyProf), a benchmark (Benchmark::IPS) or normal test run. 2/ Some of my benchmarks do have expect clauses to validate that things are working before invoking the benchmark.

Giants that prefer the hyphenated spelling—Merriam-Webster, The Chicago Manual of Style, and The New Yorker, have a good reason for doing so. E-mail is a compound noun, made out of two words—“electronic” and “mail.” The e in e-mail is an abbreviation for “electronic,” and it’s used in a lot of other words as well—e-commerce, e-learning, and e-business, for example. There are also other compound nouns formed from an abbreviation and a noun, like the H-bomb, which is short for hydrogen bomb. The general rule of hyphenation in compound words that combine a single letter (or a number) and a word is to hyphenate them. So, based on tradition, e-mail is the correct way to do it.

When chatting with my father about the proton research he summed it up nicely, that two possible responses to hearing that how we measure something seems to change its nature, throwing the reliability of empirical testing into question, are: “Science has been disproved!” or “Great!  Another thing to figure out using the Scientific Method!” The latter reaction is everyday to those who are versed in and comfortable with the fact that science is not a set of doctrines but a process of discovery, hypothesis, disproof and replacement.  Yet the former reaction, “X is wrong therefore the system which yielded X is wrong!” is, in fact, the historical norm.

It's always a good idea to avoid things like 'both', since it's not future-proof — if we decided we wanted to support method overrides via headers, for example (which is sometimes used to get around firewalls that disallow non-GET/POST requests), then 'both' would need to become 'all', which would be a breaking change.

“All your users are non-JS while they're downloading your JS”

The backslash character does not concatenate any strings. It prevents the line-break from meaning that those two lines are different statements. Think of the backslash as the opposite of the semicolon. The semicolon lets two statements occupy one line; the backslash lets one statement occupy two lines.

Think of the backslash as the opposite of the semicolon. The semicolon lets two statements occupy one line; the backslash lets one statement occupy two lines.

As a software developer, what would you say if a user came to you and said "it's not working"?