> Cross-site scripting (XSS) safe front-end frameworks like React are good because they prevent XSS. XSS is bad because it allows an attacker to take over your active web session and do horrible things
What? React is not "Cross-site scripting safe"
Many security controls do require more than a 2-3 sentence explanation. Trying to condense your response in such a way strips out any sort of nuance such as examples of how react can be susceptible to XSS. Security is a subset of engineering and security decisions often require a trade off. React does protect against some classes of attacks, but also exposes applications to new ones.
> In the US, 14.5% of men are 6ft or taller.
Among CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, 58% are 6ft or taller (4x increase)
3.9% of men are 6’2’’ or taller, among F500 CEOs, 30% are 6’2’’ or taller (7.6x increase)
10% of F500 companies are run by women as of 2023[1]. It's interesting the author assumed all F500 CEOs are men. I would also be interested on the source of height for the F500 CEOs. If it is self-reported it is possible that some of them aren't quite as tall as they say.
> If you increase the capacity of the road system however that's accomplished and more people use it that's a win.
This ignores the cost/benefit of constructing more car infrastructure in heavily urbanized areas and the cost of owning a car for transportation. It ceases to be an economic multiplier when you compare it to cheaper alternatives. You are also painting car infrastructure as some sort of panacea, but it costs households a lot of money (almost 1/5th of their total income[1]) to use a car for transportation.
Not only are cars expensive, but their expense is inversely correlated with income (poor people spend more money on cars). In the USA we spend much more on transportation than in EU countries[2]. From the standpoint of the average American family, car infrastructure is much costlier than the alternatives.
> More lanes helps because now more people are able to get where they want to go!
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but no one wants to get to the 5 or 6 lane highway. They are using the highway to get to smaller 1-2 lane surface roads and parking areas with limited capacity. Eventually you will hit a bottleneck in surface roads or parking that you cannot improve easily or cheaply. The larger highways only serve to get people to the bottlenecks in the system faster.
The main problem with global emissions is with developing countries who are increasing their emissions while at the same time taking up a greater share of global emissions than developed countries.
> How different would the situation be if the US midwest and south were on the hotter side of the scale, rather than the cooler one?
If the effect of global warming were felt equally in the US and that somehow caused the US to halt 100% of their emissions it would reduce global emissions by about 11% [1].
I have always struggled with just how difficult it is to retain long form text over HTML. Even if you block the ads, the hyperlinks and strange font choices can make it difficult.
The solution I figured out was to use a Kobo e-reader with Pocket. The integration with Firefox is actually quite seamless. You can basically just take a webpage, save it to pocket, and then sync it to your e-reader and read the article there. I have found this to be the best way to consume acoup's content.
You have a somewhat justifiable position, but you lost me when you started talking about social media posts. In your proposed rationing of "climate relief" it shouldn't be focused on people's thoughts. It should, instead, focus on specific actions people have taken or not taken that directly impact the client.
I could see something like a carbon credit for individuals based on their actions that impact the climate such as limiting their power use, not driving their car frequently, or not having pets. This type of rationing also has problems, though, as it starts to become effectively limiting things to wealthy people who can afford a lifestyle in which they can use a car less frequently or own an energy-efficient home for example.
I don't think there is a reasonable way of rationing climate relief in a morally justifiable way.
I assume there is some particular combination of factors at play here:
The US has a very advanced military and intelligence apparatus which operates globally.
The US has an enormous area that it operates in domestically (large areas of both the Pacific and Atlantic oceans).
The US also has a relatively open culture and emphasizes free speech.
When you look at all of these factors it seems that by having all of them it makes it a lot more likely for people to detect UAPs and then talk about them. The other thing that might be at play here is that, as an American, I have no idea what a credible news source would be from Botswana and it is unlikely to be in English even if I would consume it in the first place.
I would put my money on a junior enlisted / junior officer not paying attention when they type the email to book their hotel over a government conspiracy to generate a Casus Belli to invade Mali of all places.
XSS and SQLi can happen independently of the memory safety of your chosen programming language. You can use relatively safe frameworks or ORMs to generate HTML and interact with your DB, but there will sometimes be complex use cases that require you to extend or otherwise not use those safeguards.
Similarly, I imagine that there are cases where someone needs to do complex wood working tasks that involve dangers which are a less obvious than with a table saw.
It would be beneficial to your understanding if you read the article. The title is slightly misleading.
> Even though the dataset used for the unofficial record goes back only to 1979, Kapnick said that given other data, the world is likely seeing the hottest day in “several hundred years that we’ve experienced.”
>It encouraged workers to vacation with groups of relative strangers as opposed to their friends and families.
This can actually work out well. I experienced something similar in the US while on vacation. I was traveling with someone from Glenwood Springs, CO to Denver, CO via Amtrak. We went to the dining car for lunch an since there were two of us and space is at a premium, the Amtrak policy was to seat us with one or two random strangers. We sat and had lunch with an oil executive and someone's grandmother and it was quite an interesting experience and we got to meet two strangers. It was actually a highlight of that train trip.
I feel like the experience of having unplanned social interactions with strangers is often missing in modern American life. I don't know if the Soviet style of assigning vacation groups via a worker's committee would be pleasant, but I can't help but think things would be better if we had more situations where we are "forced" to engage with strangers.
Buc-ees somehow manages to have gas stations with over 100 pumps[1]. I am usually skeptical of claims that the free market will sort it out, but it is easy to underestimate how powerful financial incentives can be. I don't think it will take long for EV "gas" stations to exist.
I believe that is the point the OP was making. If you're ROI on employee X is 3% of the investors' dollar, the investor would simply buy a bond since the ROI on the bond is higher. Because of this discrepancy it no longer makes sense to keep employees or business units with a 3% ROI or an ROI lower than what the expected return on a bond is.
It isn’t surprising that they want to start in Atlanta, as the combination of few renter protections, lax code enforcement, and affordable housing subsidies can combine to make an ideal situation for maximizing profit at the cost of human misery.
It is difficult to determine if researchers are measuring the effect of caffeine itself or the effect of individuals taking caffeine to recover from the effects of caffeine withdrawal. This is a common weakness in studies that show purported benefits to caffeine consumption[1,2,3].
Anecdotally as someone who quit caffeine entirely about a year ago, the effects of caffeine withdrawal seemed to last much longer than the 24 hour period that many studies ask participants to abstain for.
I am not attempting to take a side in either direction here, but I noticed something interesting about the format of your reply in contrast with the person you're replying to. The person you were responding to broke their post up into paragraphs that were organized into sentences (sort of like you'd expect in a book). Your reply seems to be broken up into individual paragraphs that are >240 characters (coincidentally the same character limit as Tweets).
I don't mean this as an attack. It seems interesting to me that the way people can communicate in writing can be influenced by what type of media they consume.
For Gmail the email "[email protected]" is interchangeable with "[email protected]". Some services that rely on simple email auth do not make the same distinction (Such as Slack). You may have signed up with periods and are attempting to restore access to a non-period address.
What? React is not "Cross-site scripting safe"
Many security controls do require more than a 2-3 sentence explanation. Trying to condense your response in such a way strips out any sort of nuance such as examples of how react can be susceptible to XSS. Security is a subset of engineering and security decisions often require a trade off. React does protect against some classes of attacks, but also exposes applications to new ones.