it_depends_man

joined 5 months ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Sorry, I can't seem to find it, but I can tell you that those filters exist on mastodon. I am using them a lot there.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Having an easy on the eyes markdown that is also easy to parse would be cool.

But YAML does these things:

https://ruudvanasseldonk.com/2023/01/11/the-yaml-document-from-hell

which are not excusable, for any reason.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I'm not sure now that I think about it, but I find this more explicit and somehow more free than json. Which can't be true, since you can just

{"anything you want":{...}}

But still, this:

<my_custom_tag>
<this> 
<that>
<roflmao>
...

is all valid.

You can more closely approximate the logical structure of whatever you're doing without leaving the internal logic of the... syntax?

<car>
<tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve>  </tyre>
<tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve>  </tyre>
<tyre>      <valve>open</valve>  </tyre>
<tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve>  </tyre>
</car>

Maybe I just like the idea of a closing tag being very specific about what it is that is being closed (?). I guess I'm really not sure, but it does feel nicer to my brain to have starting and closing tags and distinguishing between what is structure, what is data, what is inside where.

My peeve with json is that... it doesn't properly distinguish between strings that happen to be a number and "numbers" resulting in:

myinput = {"1":"Hello",1:"Hello"}
tempjson = json.dumps(myinput)
output = json.loads(tempjson)
print(output)
>>>{'1': 'Hello'}

in python.

I actually don't like the attributes in xml, I think it would be better if it was mandatory that they were also just more tagged elements inside the others, and that the "validity" of a piece of xml being a certain object would depend entirely on parsing correctly or not.

I particularly hate the idea of attributes in svg, and even more particularly the way they defined paths.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/SVG/Tutorial/Paths#curve_commands

It works, but I consider that truly ugly. And also I don't understand because it would have been trivial to do something like this:

<path><element>data</element><element>data</element></path>
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

YAML

To each their own indeed.

;)

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (12 children)

It is very cool, specifically as a human readable mark down / data format.

The fact that you can make anything a tag and it's going to be valid and you can nest stuff, is amazing.

But with a niche use case.

Clearly the tags waste space if you're actually saving them all the time.

Good format to compress though...

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 months ago (1 children)

It is broken in the sense that it's absolutely insane that they can take 30% and nobody can build a competing product that only takes 20%.

It is not broken in the sense that they keep doing what they are doing and developers and customers consistently choose their offer.

It's not a monopoly because they exploit their position.

It's a monopoly because nobody else is trying hard enough.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago

I would do this if I could order it and have it arrive in a reasonable time.

Not really motivated to build it myself.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago

"The computer" decides when to install updates and which ones to install.

[–] [email protected] 76 points 4 months ago

No.

You know how boxers don't beat up their trainers?

This is like that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

A bit, but not really. The key is to understand that it can be applied to very small scale and very simple processes as well. But that it's still the same concept.

E.g.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_%28device%29

Or not getting enough sleep by noticing you're tired and changing your daily routine to change it.

People have tried to run economies with it and that... failed. I think it could be interesting to try it again now that we have seriously wide spread internet access and fast, cheap communication. But forcing it on everyone is probably a bad idea and it's not even necessary. For example, if the data is just easy to access, big companies should do it themselves. That's their entire purpose. We're just hindering efforts that way, because the data interfaces are usually not designed to make it this easy. Like, we don't have a common standard to order material online, or to watch those prices.

So when a fast food chain orders potatoes for their fries and steel mill orders coal and iron, they're using different systems that have to be maintained.


And the reason I'm writing it here, is that people don't know about it. Therefore they don't demand it from their democratic leaders or unions and therefore we don't have it.

I'm not saying anything new.

It's the same kind of voting, negotiation, discussion system we already use everyday. Those just look different when they are the same thing. We are 95% there, we're just missing one or two last steps.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago

Yeah, except I'm on your side, and that kind of protest is obviously not getting it done.

Because it's what has been tried for decades and the problem is still there.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Having this problem can also be managed by going through the loop. If you original goal was "calculate stuff to prevent bad things", and you can't do it because you're choosing too much accuracy, you can experiment with the accuracy until you find a good middle ground.

We can use super detailed FEM, CFD what not sophisticated science, but sometimes the stuff from the 1800s is just fine.

view more: next ›