It’s a little thing, but one that keeps coming up again and again with new apps, so I thought I’d get down some thoughts about how the origin checks performed by Phoenix to protect websocket connections from cross-site attacks.
I'm excited about this as a way to configure my Fly.io apps in a more declarative way. One of my biggest gripes about Fly.io is that there's a lightly documented bespoke config format to learn (fly.toml), and at the same time there's a ton of stuff you can't even do with that config file.
I love Kubernetes because the .yaml gives you have the entire story, but I'd _really_ love to get that experience w/o having to run Kubernetes. (Even in most managed k8s setups, I've found the need to run lots of non-managed things inside the cluster to make it user-friendly.)
My favorite feature is the way source code links are added automatically and consistently. Just look for the little </> links to the right of the module / function / macro name!
I send links to specific lines or chunks of code pretty much every day (using a similar VS Code plugin), usually to show an example of a pattern or show where / how a particular piece of logic is implemented. Or sometimes to give an idea of a possible home for a new piece of logic
I thought the article was pretty careful to attribute the rise of canning more to psychological factors than to household budgets:
In times of economic insecurity like the last recession in 2009, when McClellan started her Food in Jars blog, people turned to canning to soothe their fears, and mason jar sales took off.
...
“When there are these big downfalls of trust in systems of government or economy or institutions, there’s this desire to retain control wherever we can find it,” she says.
I always do destructive SQL commands in two steps: first run a select using the WHERE clause you intend to use and verify which records will be affected, then hit the up arrow and edit the beginning of the query leaving the WHERE intact.
I also like adding redundant conditions to the WHERE so a typo in any single one of them won't sink me.
Just because it's not enough doesn't mean it's delusional.
I'm a vegetarian partly out of compassion for the animals who might be eaten and partly because of the other harmful effects of industrialized meat production.
In addition, I don't own a car and try to avoid non-human-powered transportation in general, I use air conditioning extremely sparingly despite living in Louisiana, I avoid buying crap I don't need online or in person, and I choose my foods and their sources carefully.
These are all personal choices, and I'm sharing them not to lecture or to be holier than thou. I'm just trying to say this: Maybe the correct reaction to "being a vegetarian alone won't save the world," is "I should be thoughtful about all the ways my choices impact the world" rather than "I'll have the 72oz steak."
I personally push code every Friday morning, and keep my Friday schedule relatively open so I have time to deal with any surprises.
Many successful companies brag (justifiably) about their continuous deployment systems and speed of deployment. I can't believe they suspend all of that every Friday.
I don't think it's being taught adequately to lots of people who aren't destined for careers in tech or academia. Look at the nearly universal disdain for math and especially "story problems," as well as the mystical aura of "coding" outside of those tech / academic circles.
In that context, I do think early encounters with programming might be a great entry point to "computational thinking" for some who aren't well served by existing curricula. It certainly makes more sense to me than trying to train every child to write code for its own sake.
> clearly the deciding factor why that person got the talk was because she was a woman
Wow, what a coincidence! Every time I'm disappointed by a talk at a conference, I just know intuitively exactly why that person was chosen to present. Until now, I thought I was the only person with that super power.
I'm sorry for being obnoxious, but it's worth thinking about why it's so easy to reach this kind of conclusion. Maybe it's a bias that's so pervasive in our culture that we don't even realize it's there.
That section struck me like a brick when I heard them reciting the Declaration on NPR yesterday morning. Later I saw this NYT opinion piece: "Did a Fear of Slave Revolts Drive American Independence" [1]. The article doesn't quite support the sensationalist headline, but it's interesting nonetheless.
In fact, I'd say the unspoken premise of the article is that economic success equals human wealth. From there, it argues mainly that economic success is increasingly determined by intelligence.
Strangely, the article ignores the strong anti-intellectual undercurrent in American culture, which may be a byproduct of these economic changes, and which seems to be the focus of many comments here.
What about a simple policy of revisiting the salary discussion on a regular (annual?) basis. As long as it's transparent and universal (not just for people who ask for a raise), it seems like it'd be in line with your philosophy.