This is a nice graph for debunking the idea that biology offers a sort of refuge for the proponents of a strict binary sexual framework. Let it be known that once in a while some people born with penises are XX while some people born with vulvas are XY, and that this is just the tip of the iceberg. Maleness and femaleness might be fact as poles of a spectrum (might be more complicated); what they are NOT is an either/or mutually exclusive phenomenon. The distribution of the population on that supposed spectrum probably look like an inverted bell curve, with most persons closer to either end… but to be honest I suspect the curve is not as pronounced as we are led to think.

Personally speaking I’m forty something and by now I’m convinced I’m not 100% pure male stuff. I don’t give a shit if it’s biological or social. I feel it in a myriad of ways. I’m comfortable enough in the way I’m treated and perceived though so I let sleeping dogs lie and ride the male label. I’m hairy, I have a dick, I don’t want trouble. So this is totally unscientific, but I swear sometimes I recognize this same ambiguous essence in someone else; there’s a faint feeling of kinship. I’m willing to bet the silent majority has plenty of folks who wouldn’t have minded being a wee bit further from the poles if others didn’t make such a fucking fuss about it.

Runs away from doomscrolling

Lands on this beauty: https://longdogechallenge.com/

Oh this is interesting, but how do we get identical twins then? How come we get two gastrulation processes doing the exact same dance side by side, if not DNA?

Also I didn’t know about Copy Cat. Being a clone and coming out nothing like the original, what a cat thing to do. They’ll wiggle out of anything, them adorable bastards.

3/14 is a weird way to write March 14th, but April 31st is just not happening.

I don’t see the contradiction. If you’re doing CRUD operations on 10,000 points, I’m sure you’re doing what’s possible to send it to storage in one fell swoop. You most probably get out of those loops any operation that doesn’t need to be repeated as well.

There’s some simple rules of thumb that can be inferred from Big O notation. For example, I try to be careful with what I do in nested loops whose number of repetitions will grow with application usage. I might be stepping into O(n^2) territory, this is not the place for database queries.

We’re definitely lightyears away from that cursed era of building layouts with float.

Ah OK, so this paper argues that given the right conditions the appearance of life is not necessarily likely. Basically it’s hard to know for sure with a single example (Earth). If it is in fact unlikely, it could explain why we haven’t met extraterrestrial life already. Thanks!

Can someone explain for the layperson?

Wikipedia (citing NASA) states that the force would be 1,200 megatons in TNT equivalent. Tsar Bombas being 54 megatons, Bennu is 22 Tsar Bombas.

NASA already landed a spacecraft on Bennu and picked a sample. It’s due to arrive on Earth in just three days.

I’m old ahem experienced too and I went from no app development to having a basic native app on my Android phone in a few days with Flutter/dart. The language is easy to pick up, there’s plenty of documentation and it’s pretty polyvalent since it can build for mobile, desktop or web.

I’ve worked in a small org with very few devs. I was the only one for a while. I think the most important in this sort of environment is to care.

I’ve found it useful to pay attention to the org’s goals and strategy as well as being interested in how operations work. This is because you may end up taking a ton of microdecisions during development and you want them to align. As your understanding grows and you slowly take your place, you may be consulted as well for all sorts of things.

You’ll need to take your personal technical growth into your own hands. The org should be expecting you to do so and they may even grow interested in what exciting new stuff you’ve learned.

Also if you have plenty of non technical colleagues, translating your technical reality into layman’s terms and in actual impact is key. It’s important to build that bridge.

It can be a super rewarding experience! The fact you love the place and you’re already wary not to stagnate makes me think you’re a good fit.

News flash: your snark makes you an unpleasant person. Read my comment again. I said tree shaking fixes this… unless you don’t know what content you’ll display and what classes you’ll need at build time. Not all sites are static.

Tailwind only really makes sense in a precise use case that absolutely does not cover everything web based and I wish the makers where clearer about it.

First off, the abstraction problem: since you give up on defining custom classes at length, elements will often receive more than a dozen utility classes. This is fine IF you use a component based framework like Vue and you break down your app into components with a small granularity.

Second, the stylesheet problem: even minified and compressed, a stylesheet containing all of Tailwind’s utility classes is multiple Megabytes. The issue will not come from where you’d expect; downloading may take a while on the first page load, but all page loads will suffer from taking into account such a massive set of rules. Tree shaking makes this fine IF your content is already known at the moment of building the app.

In the end I feel that Tailwind implements ideas on top of tech it is incompatible with and the abstractions it create are seriously leaking.

(It’s OK guys! This isn’t about cryptocurrency, it’s about cryptography!)

Cryptography is FUN. The kind of fun that gives you headaches and keeps you up at night. (No /s, I mean it.)

I wasn’t aware of this site at all. I’ll keep it bookmarked since I enjoyed cryptography in university way more than I had expected to.