Axioms are not like the others, they're assumed to be true even before considering any evidence or even arguments.

This is a somewhat surprising position to see in the fediverse...

(I mean, I get what you're saying, and I guess someone should bring that to the party, but there is s different way)

I worked on exactly this for a while, a long, long time ago. It turns out to be an annoyingly difficult bag of problems. The record companies don't really care, they sell (sold, I guess) pieces of plastic. (Idk if they fixed it yet, but the same Turbonegro album kept getting sent with the same scratches, kept getting taken down a while later, for years.) So, good luck trusting them to label anything.

Puritans are so much more aggressive than sane people that making mistakes one way is much more expensive than the other way.

Anyway, we ended up trying to work out which tracks are actually the same song, (Easy for you, harder for friend computer, yes?) and then if one of them is marked explicit, they all are, unless marked "radio edit" or "clean", or whatever. If you think about this for a minute, if one track is labeled "radio edit", maybe the other ones should be marked explicit...

It's a deep rabbit hole, is what I'm saying.

And the people with the pitchforks are never happy.

Ok, TIL there's a thing called Required, but otherwise, one way to do this is to rename the other part/field/key(s), so that old code reveals itself in much the same way as using a deleted field (because it does, actually)

Another way is explicitly have a separate type for records with/without the feature. (if one is a strict subset, you can have a downgrade/slice method on the more capable class.

Lastly, I would say that you need static typing, testing, both. People from static-land get vertigo without types, and it does give good night sleep, but it's no substitute for testing. Testing can be a substitute for static typing in combination with coverage requirements, but at that point you're doing so much more work that the static typing straight jacket seems pretty chill.

Going all in on the stock option program, even if it was a little risky. I remember the argument: There's no lottery or casino that'll give me odds like these. I also left when we'd grown to the point where middle management didn't want to understand that when the program ran out (4 years) and had to be restarted at the new validation, that was basically a static pay cut for me. I get paid a lot more now, but I still made more from stocks than work last year.

Second, our apartment. It's a lot like a row house, except it's in the city. The other part backs right up to the park.

Third, maxing out parental leave with both of our kids at a company that (as, more or less, a recruiting gimmick) topped up parental leave pay from the capped 80% to, iirc, 100% with no cap. They turned out be quite dumb about this and had shuffled me into a corner when I came back. I was ready to put my back into it, but well, I guess not then.

(The one without the parentheses is older Python 2, the example with is newer Python 3)

What part of 25% below market makes you compare him to the food oligopoly? He likes trouble-free tenants, and I'm pretty sure his tenants like this arrangement too. By contast, you come off as very tiresome. Do you have any skin in the game? What are you doing to help make housing affordable? Do you do anything besides exemplify why having revolutionaries in charge would be terrifying?

Well, I guess I have two thoughts on that. For one, what you're probably thinking of is seen as basically qanon freaks. The other is that of course there's a political right, and of course there is a social conservative current.

The right has traditionally been a coalition of liberals and conservatives, but the Christian conservatives are actually Christian. (They command a certain degree of respect, even though I don't agree)

As for the social conservatives, they're to a large degree absorbed by either the traditional social democrats (or "total autocrats" as I like to call them) or the nazis.

The WHAT?

Yes. The left was so busy suppressing racism (real) that they made it basically impossible to have adult conversation about the problems inherent in eliminating low-education jobs and, at the same time, accepting a lot of illiterate refugees. And as the reality of taking from the middle class boomers (who strongly identify as working class) to fund the result, the nazis were there, and they're scary huge now.

Idk, there's a lot to unpack and explain here, and I'm sure others have other angles, so I'll leave it at that.

Oh, you mean a mass movement of anarcho-communist activism would slash the tires of private cars?

No.

It's even wilder. This is just normal people having a union.

Iirc, the company faltered and floundered very badly afterwards. The (now unionized) workers had to say, "it's OK now, we got a contact!", but that message was hard to get out, since it's a lot less sexy than the strife.

They basically wrecked the company, trying to fight the union

Yep. I even got this back when cleaners moved my mouse from in front of key keyboard spacebar to the right of the keypad, until I noticed what had happened.

I put my mouse between my body and the keyboard and it goes away.

Good luck!

It was harder to explain why picking on Python for this is dumb, before gotofail... (Not saying that's what you're doing, but it feels close, so this is relevant.)

For whitespace, my rule is this: If any level of indentation depends on the length of any word or name, you're doing it wrong. If using a more descriptive name causes indentation where previously there was none, that's fine, but if moving the opening parens causes the interior to be indented more, less so. (Yes, Golang's structs)