mhermher

7 ms·

1.
by mhermher 3y ago
Same. We use both. Slack for chat. Mostly Teams for video.
2.
by mhermher 3y ago
I remember the Java updater, which basically anyone using a computer had to occasionally update.
3.
by mhermher 3y ago
For me, it's more of a database to keep track of books I want to read in the future . I can't read everything immediately after reading a recommendation or seeing it mentioned somewhere. Mostly I use goodreads to organize this li
4.
by mhermher 3y ago
Maybe my queries are not difficult enough. Do you have an example?
5.
by mhermher 3y ago
They pack it very tightly in my experience. The packaging (cardboard) wraps very tightly against the books.
6.
by mhermher 4y ago
There were so many English speaking students while I was there. I wonder if it's unique to Grenoble.
7.
by mhermher 4y ago
What does this have to do with the submission?
8.
by mhermher 4y ago
The point of turning off the gas is to demonstrate the point that you can turn it off *or on*. That you have control over it. Whats the point of turning off the gas as leverage if it *stays off*? That would be no leverage at all.
9.
by mhermher 4y ago
What I mean to say is that it doesn't matter to know who physically performed the actions, only to know who planned and directed it. Just like we might blame bin Laden for 9/11 even though he didn't fly the planes. He was on
10.
by mhermher 4y ago
Europe is sanctioning the hell out of Russia, and yet Gazprom would pay huge penalties on violating a contract. If anything this story shows why it's unlikely they blew up the pipeline. After that whole legalese theater, they just deci
11.
by mhermher 4y ago
Any serious opposition to Putin is actually more hawkish than he is. Not quite something that is covered often in our press. There is no neo Yeltsin lurking in the shadows.
12.
by mhermher 4y ago
Prevent negotiations between Russia and Germany particularly. Then sell exorbitantly priced US LNG to a captive Europe. All of which is basically happening now.
13.
by mhermher 4y ago
Pressure the market in what way that isn't accomplished by just turning the pipeline off without blowing it up? And pressure Germany into what exactly? Think this one through. How does removing the possibility of re-opening the pipelin
14.
by mhermher 4y ago
I think it's unreasonable to believe that you could intentionally half-way blow up a pipeline. And the only reasonable conclusion here is that the intention was to blow all of it up. Why would Russia want to even get out of those con
15.
by mhermher 4y ago
Ukrainians may have been involved, but the US would have been the necessary component, and the UK additionally would have been sufficient.
16.
by mhermher 4y ago
You don't think that the US and UK can jointly plan to do something without holding hands? It doesn't really matter who actually physically did it. What's important is who intended to it, which is probably both of them. Maybe
17.
by mhermher 4y ago
It was the threat that it would be turned back on that is the reason that rules in US as a culprit. It was already not being used! Russia would blow it up to get out of some contract? Does that sound like a serious idea to you? Do any contr
18.
by mhermher 4y ago
Maybe you just weren't paying attention as much. They did talk extensively about it.
19.
by mhermher 4y ago
The US and UK in some form.
20.
by mhermher 4y ago
This has nothing to do with what they said. Completely irrelevant to the question at hand.
21.
by mhermher 4y ago
Not really the point of the comment above whether Musk has done some good things or not. Specifically, he has literally lied about what Tesla is able to do. That's why his number would come up. He has knowingly said things he knew to b
22.
by mhermher 4y ago
So then, should the useful heuristic include the US as well? By far, the most imprisoning country in the history of the Earth? Whose major technology companies have been clearly documented to be funneling user information to that same state
23.
by mhermher 4y ago
Your useful heuristic is that any Chinese idea in inherently bad?
24.
by mhermher 4y ago
I think a lot of those decisions were made to maximize easing existing JS code into typescript. And it probably helped with adoption. Who knows if or how much it would have struggled with traction if anyone wanting to use it would have to s
25.
by mhermher 4y ago
Your second point is such a lost gem of history. I still remember it well and remember how upset it made me. But it seems the world has forgotten, and just assumes that Chrome just meteorically shot up in usage just on its merit. Did you ju
26.
by mhermher 4y ago
Sorry, I meant specifically the "syntax" of your type is not TS. It's those object literal constructions you mention.
27.
by mhermher 4y ago
Agree with all of that, but also, it's been at quite a while since I used it. I'm sure it's improved a lot since then, and my memory might be off as well. I really remember not being able to get it to work with generics. But
28.
by mhermher 4y ago
yeah. You have to assert an object (`Record<string, unknown>`) type first within your asserter (or array or whatever). We ended up having whole stacks of re-usable assertion functions to be used at these boundaries (re-usable on serve
29.
by mhermher 4y ago
It's a neat library, but you end up defining your types in an external (outside of TS) syntax, and you lose a lot of language-server features. Also, last I checked it could not handle generics. But it's been a while.
30.
by mhermher 4y ago
I really wanted this in my earlier usage of typescript as well. But the solution really is to assume `: unknown` at API boundaries and run the values through assertion functions: `isSomeType(x: unknown): asserts x is SomeType`. After using

More ›