Honestly, I've always preferred other Lisps (specifically Racket and Clojure). But among desserts, flan has a special place in my heart. I don't let myself indulge these days but thanks to the delectable drawing in this article, I might go get some this evening!
Thanks for understanding. Security engineering is growing so complex. I don't know how major corps on the scale of Boeing ever achieve compliance. And even then, they have a whole market of different compliance standards to comply with.
> I don't know how major corps on the scale of Boeing ever achieve compliance.
It's not that hard. They just remove all of your agency as a user. You can push commits, open branches & pull requests, and merge if 2 people approve it. And that's it.
Want to merge? Restricted. Make a new repo? Restricted. Use a GitHub Action? Restricted. CODEOWNERS? Restricted. Branch filters? Restricted. Forks? Restricted. Releases, packages, artifacts, security, insights, settings, webhooks, environments, pages, wiki, issues? Restricted. Access a repo you aren't a member of? Restricted. Protected tags, dependency graph, dependabot, code scanning, secret scanning, deploy keys, secrets, github apps, oauth, notifications? Restricted. Stars? Restricted. And your SSO token expires every hour.
When working on open source software and collaborating via public GitHub, you can almost forget that git is a distributed version control system.
But in the restricted corporate setups you describe, git's distributed nature shines.
They can lock down internal GitHub as much as they want to, but that won't keep you from making local commits, or exchanging commits directly with your coworkers while developing.
> I don't know how major corps on the scale of Boeing ever achieve compliance.
Boring, repetitive software development processes that prioritizes closing potential holes vs. speed of development. When you stop to think about it, explains quite a bit of why big companies are so slow to release?
Is it really the norm to twist the cookies apart and lick the frosting, like in the commercials? I eat them whole, two at a time, like a pig. Well, that's when I do eat them. I haven't had oreos in many years now.
> Despite that description triggering a diabetic coma while I read this, I am suddenly overcome by the urge to join you for breakfast
Fear not, for I have a keto friendly alternative when I eat breakfast with friends who don't want carbs!
I've found that just 2 to 3 lankato vanilla drops in a small glass of a 50/50 mix of half and half and heavy whipping cream gives me a drink that tastes just like melted icecream (or whipped cream) so I can do without Oreos.
However, just a drink might be too light of a break, so on the side I add eggs deep fried in olive oil "spanish style" (bubbly brownish white but runny yoke)
That is a good recipe. I used to add 1 cup of sugar + a garnish of brown sugar to a big salad bowl of ice cream. I had to stop because I would sweat profusely and be unable to sleep.
This is marvelous! The really annoying thing about doing this then was that I had to enter my programs manually via the calculator.
Now that I'm free I could connect the calculator to my laptop and code via a fancy TI-BASIC IDE. On the other hand, now that I'm free, I can just use Godot or something if I wanted to make games ;)
Edit: this code uses a lot of features I didn't know about then (since I just had the manual that came with the calculator, which didn't go into a ton of depth about TI-BASIC features). I wish I could have watched this back then!
This article links to another called "PHP Sucks", which is a broken link - that's the third time I've run into that same broken link this week. I guess it's destiny that I go and read it for real.
Not answering your question but Patricia Lockwood (one of my favorite authors) wrote a very amusing memoir called Priestdaddy about growing up with a father who was a Catholic priest (having converted from Anglicanism I believe). The book also doesn't really answer your question, but it's fantastic despite the awful name.
>It’s about how you framed and excused your behavior.
No need for excuses whatsoever - if someone on here has a stolen book they want to gift me, I'll accept it with no shame or guilt. The joke wasn't meant to be an excuse, but for what it's worth, my emotional frame towards what she did is gratitude.
I'd love to discuss this with you, since we have interestingly divergent viewpoints on how I should have reacted. Feel free to hit me up: the.jesus.aviles [at] gmail.com
> if someone on here has a stolen book they want to gift me, I'll accept it with no shame or guilt.
Knowingly accepting stolen property is both unethical and illegal.
This isn’t an unexplored ethical frontier; I appreciate the offer for further discussion, but I don’t think there’s anything novel either of us can contribute on the subject.
> but for what it's worth, my emotional frame towards what she did is gratitude.
Sounds to me like the basic conflict here is the OP holds to expressive individualism of the sort historian Carl Trueman describes in his book, The Rise and Triumph of the Modern Self [0]; while the commenter appears to believe that moral/ethical reality exists external to human persons, thus stealing and being an accessory to theft are wrong, regardless of one's emotional frame.
Thats interesting, are you saying there are serious people who claim that the wrongness of theft depends on the emotional frame (and havent been paid by russia over the last decades with the intention to subvert western society?)
She advocated for something incompatible with the complete prohibition of the C programming language, which is a far greater crime than the theft of any physical object.
My goto strategy is to laugh at how silly the joke is, rather than try to make people painfully explain something to show everyone how bad the joke is.
I guess some people really dislike like lame jokes, though!
No, she wasn't dishonorable. She took the hard route, risking her own security out of love. I condemn theft, not because it's theft, but because it's harmful. In a utilitarian way, I feel like she helped me more than she harmed B&N. In terms of virtue, she displayed bravery and caring.
She just didn't care about B&N or property law. Maybe you do care about those things - I'm not condoning theft here!
Now, if you had said Code of "This Chick Turns Out To Be Completely Insane And This Should Have Been A Red Flag" you'd be closer to the mark, but that's for the next post!
>If you think a corporation is evil, you don’t have to shop there.
I don't think charging $80 is evil, but it's a high enough price to merit some light teasing. To clarify: I'm just making fun of B&N for charging a lot for a book I wanted. This isn't meant to argue that charging a lot justifies theft.
>If you think a corporation is evil, you don’t have to shop there.
This is a more interesting argument, that has nothing to do with what I said, but is still fun to think about. Surely, if a corporation is evil, a reasonable response would exceed "don't shop there".
>I don't think charging $80 is evil, but it's a high enough price to merit some light teasing. To clarify: I'm just making fun of B&N for charging a lot for a book I wanted.
Is this really the bookstore's fault? Book prices these days seem to be set by publishers, not sellers, and those prices are actually printed right on the books. The book will cost the same no matter where you buy it, unless the bookseller is discounting it for some reason, but B&N usually sells books at full MSRP.
No, not at all. Like, this morning, my hair looked wild, so my wife teased me about it. It merits teasing, not because the hair was my fault, but just because it was funny looking.
Similarly, I'm making fun of B&N for an aesthetic flaw, not a moral one.
