44 Matching Annotations
  1. Dec 2023
  2. Nov 2023
  3. Oct 2023
    1. say you want to print the visiting users IP address - how would you do this on a statically generated website? to be honest i'm not sure. typically, you would scrape a header and display it
    1. but not hate speech that meet the standards of ECHR Article 10; which is to say that the views espoused in by this person were also deemed “worthy of respect in a democratic society”

      This is incorrect. This is the opposite of what was held in Lilliendahl.

      The ECtHR held in that case that the appellant was not entitled to relief, and that the €800 fine imposed on him was necessary and proportionate to his hate speech.

      What was held was that the hate speech didn't fall within the scope of Article 17 (not Article 10, as Breslow claims in this blog).

  4. Sep 2023
    1. “There are no safeguards on what information it can ask for.”

      This is wrong. Section 36 of the Act says:

      The Central Government may, for the purposes of this Act, require the Board and any Data Fiduciary or intermediary to furnish such information as it may call for.

  5. Dec 2022
  6. May 2022
  7. Jan 2022
  8. Dec 2021
  9. Nov 2021
    1. A lot less nice, that example, isn't it?

      No idea what point Troy thinks he's making here, but he certainly sounds very satisfied with it.

  10. Sep 2021
    1. Update API usage of the view helpers by changing javascript_packs_with_chunks_tag and stylesheet_packs_with_chunks_tag to javascript_pack_tag and stylesheet_pack_tag. Ensure that your layouts and views will only have at most one call to javascript_pack_tag or stylesheet_pack_tag. You can now pass multiple bundles to these view helper methods.

      Good move. Rather than having 2 different methods, and requiring people to "go out of their way" to "opt in" to using chunks by using the longer-named javascript_packs_with_chunks_tag, they changed it to just use chunks by default, out of the box.

      Now they don't need 2 similar but separate methods that do nearly the same, which makes things simpler and easier to understand (no longer have to stop and ask oneself, which one should I use? what's the difference?).

      You can't get it "wrong" now because there's only one option.

      And by switching that method to use the shorter name, it makes it clearer that that is the usual/common/recommended way to go.

  11. Aug 2021
  12. Jul 2021
  13. May 2021
    1. Because constants in Ruby aren't meant to be changed, Ruby discourages you from assigning to them in parts of code which might get executed more than once, such as inside methods.
  14. Apr 2021
    1. Adam Finn. ‘There Are Some News Outlets & Politicians Incorrectly Reporting and Criticising Respectively MHRA for Advising against Use of OxAZ in under 30s. Neither MHRA nor EMA Have Done This. JCVI Have Expressed a Preference for Alternative Vaccines for Healthy under 30s in the UK Context’. Tweet. @adamhfinn (blog), 8 April 2021. https://twitter.com/adamhfinn/status/1380031766703058944.

  15. Mar 2021
  16. Feb 2021
    1. Trust me, I thought a lot about #validate and its semantics, and I am gonna make it even more "SRP" by making Form#errors and #valid? semi-public. All that happens via #validate reducing the possible wrong usage for users.
  17. Dec 2020
    1. The only solution that I can see is to ensure that each user gets their own set of stores for each server-rendered page. We can achieve this with the context API, and expose the stores like so: <script> import { stores } from '@sapper/app'; const { page, preloading, session } = stores(); </script> Calling stores() outside component initialisation would be an error.

      Good solution.

    1. This would be cumbersome, and would encourage developers to populate stores from inside components, which makes accidental data leakage significantly more likely.
    2. which makes it much harder to accidentally keep logged-in state visible after a client-side logout
  18. Nov 2020
    1. There was a major refactoring in the resolver (https://github.com/webpack/enhanced-resolve). This means the resolving option were changed too. Mostly simplification and changes that make it more unlikely to configure it incorrectly.
  19. Oct 2020
    1. Looking at all those bearing, heading, orientation, navigation, position, direction, etc. I think we have a bigger problem here. Someone has decided how to use tag (e.g. orientation is about page orientation), but there are 100 other cases. Imho, to disallow misusing there should be no "heading", but rather "html-heading", "gps-heading", "whatelse-heading", which make mistakes impossible. So yes, "heading" should go.
  20. Aug 2020
  21. Jul 2020
  22. Nov 2019
    1. Using expect { }.not_to raise_error(SpecificErrorClass) risks false positives, as literally any other error would cause the expectation to pass, including those raised by Ruby (e.g. NoMethodError, NameError, and ArgumentError)

      Actually, those would be false negatives: the absence of a test failure when it should be there.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_positives_and_false_negatives

    1. This is called a false positive. It means that we didn't get a test failure, but we should have

      No, this is a false negative. We didn't get a test failure (that is, there is a lack of the condition (test failure)), when the condition (test failure) should have been present.

      Read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_positives_and_false_negatives

  23. Jan 2018
  24. Nov 2015
    1. distributing pamphlets that urged an overthrow of the government

      The pamphlets were urging the resistance of the draft, but the book did not state that the attempt was to overthrow the government. Only to express his political ideals.

  25. May 2015
    1. the food ban list supported by Republicans bans organic foods and a great many products that have nutritional value.

      The author confuses the WIC program list with this bill. This bill only prevents you from buying shellfish with SNAP benefits, and prevents more than a third being spent on unapproved foods.

    2. The list of “disallowed” foods, which you can view here, also includes the following

      This list is for the WIC program, which is different from the SNAP program that the bill is about.

    3. The legislation specifically bans poor people from buying any kind of shellfish, including lobster, shrimp, and crab.

      This is incorrect. The bill prevents SNAP benefits being used to buy shellfish, but doesn't ban poor people from buying shellfish outright.

    4. Assembly Bill 177 seeks to ban people who rely on food stamps to survive on a daily basis from buying a huge list of products

      This is incorrect for the same reasons given in the above annotation.

    5. a bill that would ban them from eating a multitude of foods

      This is incorrect. The bill does not ban people from eating any foods. It bans people from buying shellfish with SNAP benefits. It also bans people from spending more than a third of their SNAP benefits on unapproved foods.

    6. Wisconsin GOP Passes Bill Banning Poor People From Buying Shellfish, Potatoes And Ketchup

      This headline is inaccurate. The bill prevents SNAP benefits from being used to buy shellfish, but people are still allowed to buy shellfish with non-SNAP money. The bill also prevents people from using more than a third of their SNAP benefits on food that's not on an approved list, but potatoes are on that list, so people can spend all their benefits on potatoes if they want. Ketchup is unapproved, so people can spend only a third of their SNAP benefits on ketchup.

  26. Oct 2014
    1. The impact today of human activity appears to be comparable to the intrinsic, natural variability of the climate system itself.

      In a study comparing human impacts and natural impacts on climate over the 20th century, Wigley and Santer write that "Our results show that the expected warming due to all human influences since 1950 (including aerosol effects) is very similar to the observed warming. Including the effects of natural external forcing factors has a relatively small impact on our 1950–2005 results..." in "A probabilistic quantification of the anthropogenic component of twentieth century global warming," (Climate Dynamics, 2013).