Yeah, I really look forward to seeing more research on the ability of these PETase genes to spread. The article touched on it briefly, but it’d be great to have more insight on how much of this is due to HGT vs. something likely to originate de novo across species.
> That makes me wonder if we'll soon see mammals with gut microbiomes that can digest microplastics.
On a less serious note, my cat is deadset on this accomplishment.
Having hit those first two pain points, I changed my transcode config to 1) run every time, and 2) use a custom bash script as the transcode command. The bash script keeps a plaintext list of files + their modtime and disk size, then only transcodes files it hasn’t seen before. Because it’s a plaintext list and relatively small, there’s not a terrible performance hit since it’s paged into memory.
Not at all saying this to dismiss your criticism though; absolutely would be great to have better OOTB options. Just putting it out for anyone who wants a workaround :).
> As a general rule, simplifying and removing code is one of the best things you can do for security.
Sure, but that’s not what they’re doing in the big picture. XSLT is a tiny drop in the bucket compared to all the surface area of the niche, non-standard APIs tacked onto Chromium. It’s classic EEE.
My understanding is that contrary to popular opinion it is firefox not chrome that originally pushed for the removal, so i dont know how relavent that is. It seems like all browser vendors are in agreement on xslt.
that said, xslt is a bit of a weird api in how it interacts with everything. Not all apis are equally risky and i suspect xslt is pretty high up there on the risk vs reward ratio.
I don't know. If this speeds up their work and helps them do more with the same staff I can see this as being a good thing. a.i. is really good at combing through data to answer questions.
One (of many) issue is that this has no bearing on other regulatory regimes. So, sure, the FDA approves of the drug/device/thingy because the AI got lost and no one is checking what it's saying. But Canada's CFIA doesn't because they are still using real people or centaurs ( people + AI, but I'm not 100% sure so don't quote me on that ).
That makes it so that you can only sell the drug/device/thingy in the US and some other countries that blindly follow US FDA (mostly poorer nations with very small markets and a lack of legal recourse, they'll just turn to the EFSA/EMA).
Which fine, but that is not the bet that these large companies made about a decade ago when it came to whether or not this drug/device/thingy would be worth it to pursue. These big drugs need to pay off all the failed research with international sales. Same is somewhat true with devices (mostly internal these days). These big drug makers want stability. Profits are fine, but revenue is just as important as these pipelines are sooooo long and soooo fraught. The human body is just too variable.
The tariffs and all the monkey business with this admin is very much not good for the US when it comes to these large drug/device/thingy makers. Chaos is not good for business. They have all learned that Donny and his ilk (per the article here) do not keep their words when it comes to corruption. They do not stay bought, they are not stable.
We're already shedding jobs here in favor of moving to the EU. Yes, not India or China, but the Baltics mostly (inside Schengen zone). We lost 10 people with jobs opening up there (same day) just this last week. The EU is stable in the eyes of my very own bosses.
I can see how you got that impression and don’t fault you for it in the slightest, but that’s not accurate.
It’s not the language name for all Graphviz syntax; it’s only the syntax for renderings made with the dot engine. Each engine has its own DSL, basically.
Does it? There are slightly different DSLs for directed and non-directed graphs, some features only work with some output formats, but AFAIK, everything in the DSL in independent of the layout engine.
And if I look in my /usr/bin, I see that neato is just symlinked to dot. It's pulling the usual trick of one executable that behaves slightly differently depending on the invocation name.
Looking at the docs again with fresh eyes, I think you and fulafel are on the money.
The specific engine syntaxes are by & large mutually incompatible, but DOT does seem to be the label used for the overall lang as well as the dot-engine-compatible dialect.
Various tools use tool-specific graph attributes. For example, "rank" and "minlen" mean something to the hierarchical or layered graph layout tool (dot) but not to other layout tools. "size" and "label" are the same in all the layout tools. They all use the same underlying graph representation library with a parser generated by yacc or bison.
The documentation includes a big table of attributes that graphviz tools recognize.
With the availability of LLMs, there is better automated support now to find features that are needed. Just imagining here, but "make the layout fill the available space" or "make all the nodes look like points with associated text labels" (not sure if that even works but it should).
Speaking as a born and raised Houstonian, that’s a completely delusional claim — and you’re believing it credulously because it fulfills a narrative that appeals to your preconceived notions.
This article is the spitting definition of drawing a bullseye around an arrow. Houston’s secret sauce of preventing mass encampments is a combo of sprawl and police brutality. There aren’t as many dense areas to congregate compared to CA, and there are more places to hide away or squat to avoid notice.
The police in my city regularly go through and rip apart encampments and scatter everybody to the wind. It literally solves nothing.
I also find it pretty horrifying for someone to actively advocate for “police brutality.” By definition it is immoral and should not be desired. You can’t even be bothered to say “strong policing“ and pretend you don’t want law enforcement to abuse people who already have enough problems? You actively want them going out and hurting people? Please correct me if I’m wrong because it really comes across that way.
We have less homelessness because we put up signs saying "don't feed the homeless" (yes, real, and yes, real traffic signs) and put spikes under bridges. Oh and then the police here can basically do whatever they want.
The bay area has sprawl and has been embracing police brutality on this issue, and homelessness is not improving here. If that worked, they would try it here.
Does being born and raised in Houston make you an expert on homelessness? It's interesting you are so quick to rebuke the article with sweeping generalizations and zero data. Could it be because it does not appeal to your preconceived notions?
Houston was one of the first major cities to transfer chronically homeless individuals from encampments to one-bedroom apartments with almost zero friction (no intermediate shelters, no drug testing, no requirement to find a job). This was a highly successful program under Turner that had little to do with sprawl or police brutality.
This is multiple layers of uneducated and misguided. Apart from it being a bad idea on the surface, due to antibiotic resistance and wiping out healthy parts of the microbiome, many common antibiotics have anti-inflammatory effects separate from their antimicrobial effects: https://link.springer.com/rwe/10.1007/978-3-7643-8550-7_7
Seeing someone improve after taking antibiotics is not indicative of them having an infection that’s being treated by the antibiotics.
> Seeing someone improve after taking antibiotics is not indicative of them having an infection
It could be. It is also not indicative of them not having an infection. It just depends.
As per my limited understanding, anti-inflammatory antibiotics are more relevant for respiratory and auto-immune conditions, not too broadly otherwise. If the source of the inflammation is not treated, the temporary reduction in inflammation is pointless because the inflammation will return.
If someone is suffering as badly as the people in the article and the doctors have no idea what is going on, then the benefit of taking antibiotics outweighs the risks.
You seem to forget that this patient is suffering. Having their gut biome wiped out is nothing compared to them chronically suffering as they are.
>Hasn't that been Apple's norm for a few years now?
Not to this degree.
I’ve had 3 memory leaks in native apps, including the calculator. There’s basic alignment errors pretty much everywhere. In many places text can become fully unreadable (black on black, white on white, text over a transparent background with overlapping text below…).
It’s not slightly lowered quality, it’s the kind of inconsistency you expect mixing custom launchers and icon packs.
The article is tailing off a well-established historiographic narrative that it cites at the beginning (Will Self) but doesn’t dwell on much.
Basically, the common argument is that life WAS emphatically much more brutal in the preindustrial past, and people felt the same grief that we do today — however, such events were less likely to serve as an etiology of chronic anxiety-centered conditions like PTSD for a multitude of reasons. E.g. you can’t lay around depressed in bed all day if you rely on subsistence agriculture because you’re going to slowly and painfully starve, or you’re exposed and desensitized to brutality from a younger age, or you have less strict social requirements/expectations than a modern 9-5 would impose so you can grieve and act out on your own terms, etc.
Dan Carlin’s “Painfotainment” is a good self-contained intro to these ideas for a casual audience, if it seems up your alley.
it's not only that. trauma also hits differently if you are the only one experiencing it vs everyone around you. the group experience itself makes trauma easier to handle.
i believe (i don't know enough about this) a big factor is also how your peers treat you after you experience trauma. think about veterans coming home, friends and family don't understands what they went through. they can't talk to anyone because nobody takes them seriously, even to the point of disbelief, or they blow things out of proportion, make them into bigger thing than what the person actually experienced. maybe the veteran doesn't feel any pain, but they tell him that he should. either way, the veteran is completely misunderstood. (again, this is not backed by any knowledge of psychology, just a guess based on some personal experience)
so because in the past everyone experienced the same brutal life (except the land lords or otherwise well off), it wasn't as traumatic as it would be today.
I think you touch upon something sound, there - while societal and group trauma is certainly a thing, we generally call it culture.
On the individual level… for me, certainly, the hardest part of dealing with my particular flavour of living nightmare was that literally nobody could relate to it, and the others who went through it are scattered to the winds. When you explain something painful and the response is “I would have considered myself lucky to be in your situation” or words to the effect, it’s a rather lonely thing.
In the past, if you said “the baron came and murdered my child on a whim”, people would likely sympathise - in today’s society… well. We have such a buffet of lives and possibilities that comprehension of the worlds of others is increasingly challenging.
Solzhenitsyn put it well - can a man who is freezing understand one who is starving?
Well, I remember reading an article some time after 9/11 where they studied the incidence of PTSD in New York following that event.
Even in areas that were some distance from the towers there was a relatively high incidence. They put it down to a background level of stress including sources like violence on TV.
This was in comparison to other parts of the world that were less modern and less busy than experienced more traumatic events but had less PTSD. The conclusion was that if you generally have a more boring/ quiet life you will be better able to absorb trauma if it occurs.
Yes, and the article explores none of that. Complaining about stress from rent being high would be much more palatable if they explored those types of things, or simply didn't mention it at all. Instead they focus on the stress being from high rent vs from the reasons you point out. The way they use that quote makes it seem like they didn't read or understand the larger text, but just cherrypicked what fit with their narrative.
You write INSERT and SELECT statements for the object types you want to persist.
What is your concern re: random types popping up? SQLite springs to mind as a prime offender due to not enforcing column types OOTB, but most dialects have rather strong typing.
If we’re talking about mapping UUIDs and datetimes from their DB representations to types defined by the language stdlib, that’s usually the responsibility of the DB driver, no?
I'm talking knowing what the shape of the response and shape of the data going in ahead of time and being consistent. SQL is like a black box in and out. I mainly use Python. For that, it's nice to have things like Dataclasses for DTOs or Pydantic models or some sort of DTO class that has known field names and known types. When you use raw SQL, you lose all that or have to roll it yourself. And at that point, you're most of the way to an ORM or at least the data mapping portion of SQLAlchemy.
> Pydantic serves as a great tool for defining models for ORM (object relational mapping) libraries. ORMs are used to map objects to database tables, and vice versa.
No, that is exactly what an ORM is, plus mapping it back. Anything around that is additional toolings that no ORM needs to be ORM, but is nonetheless usefull.
Pydantic isn’t an ORM, any more than JSON.stringify() and JSON.parse() are an ORM.
Pydantic knows nothing of your database. It’s schema-on-read (a great pattern that pydantic is well suited for), or serialization, or validation, but not an ORM.
Do you advise then use Pydantic for data mapping to/from raw SQL, to avoid using a full ORM? My thinking is you're almost at an ORM with that method with tools like SQLModel that I'm unsure what the benefit is to the plain Pydantic method.
In one sense you’re right, but (at least in data projects) the goal is a bit different. We’re often reading not only from SQL databases, but also parquet files, CSV, JSON, APIs, piped input from another process’s STDOUT, and so on.
Basically we don’t always know what the future unknown data source we may be reading from, and also the schema of the source might change, but we can define what we expect on the receiving end (in pydantic), and have it fail loudly when our assumptions change.
The nice thing about SQLModel is they're still Pydantic models so you can use them with custom data mappers like parquet, csv, json, etc. I think you make a good point about keeping the data model pure so you're not dependent on a data source. But I think SQLModel largely accomplishes that, and so does SQLAlchemy's declarative dataclass mapping (though I've not used the latter).
> That makes me wonder if we'll soon see mammals with gut microbiomes that can digest microplastics.
On a less serious note, my cat is deadset on this accomplishment.
reply