I set the system prompt to try avoid censorship by substituting etc etc, it didn't listen - started generating a response and got as far as this before suddenly, [ERROR] :-)
>I'm sorry for any confusion, but it seems there might be some mix-up in your query. The year 1979 does not have a widely recognized event matching your description, and "TS" and "Cydonia" do not correspond to any known geopolitical locations or events in historical records. "Cydonia" is often associated with a region on Mars that has been subject to various conspiracy theories, but it doesn't relate to any political events or protests.
>If you're referring to a specific historical event, it could possibly be the Tian
Not really true. You can have separate queries to avoid cartesian explosions. EF Core implements it and its standard practice to use - but not enabled by default, because if you don't order by something unique you'll have a bad time.
This example is also an odd choice because... it's not the right way to do it. If you're super concerned about people misusing hashes, using string as the type is a WTF in itself. Strings are unstructured data, the widest possible value type, essentially "any" for values that can be represented. Hashes aren't even strings anyway, they're numbers that can be represented as a string in base-whatever. Of course any such abstraction leaks when prodded. A hash isn't actually a special case of string. You shouldn't inherit from string.
If you really need the branded type, in that you're inheriting from a base type that does more things than your child type.... you straight up should not inherit from that type, you've made the wrong abstraction. Wrap an instance of that type and write a new interface that actually makes sense.
I also don't really get what this branded type adds beyond the typical way of doing it i.e. what it does under the hood, type Hash = string & { tag: "hash" }. There's now an additional generic involved (for funnier error messages I guess) and there are issues that make it less robust than how it sells itself. Mainly that a Branded<string, "hash"> inherits from a wider type than itself and can still be treated as a string, uppercased and zalgo texted at will, so there's no real type safety there beyond the type itself, which protects little against the kind of developer who would modify a string called "hash" in the first place.
Search will be dead in a year or two. Nobody wants to double check information, they just want fast and easy answers, unless they're intentionally navigating to a specific website (facebook, electricity provider, etc)
NoSQL is way harder than SQL to get right if you're trying to write something performant - and you don't want to refactor everything down the line. I pick SQL because I'm lazy, not the other way round.
The only upside of NoSQL is performance. Almost everything else is harder and worse than SQL. Sure you can get your denormalised schema and never have to join anything to get all your data. But, you need to know all of your access patterns at design-time and when you need to refactor the data model in some way you're fucked and need to, I dunno, rewrite an entire table, sometimes on the fly while the system is running, which is like changing a tyre on a moving car.
For what it's worth, one CSS line lags the HELL out of my laptop on the site. It's backdrop-filter: blur(0.1875rem) for modals, like the youtube video popup
Respectfully - while that's no doubt useful for your visiting family, weighing that up vs the social costs of taking a house off the market when it could be used by a family, in the midst of what I think is the worst rental crisis in Aus history, in which many families are forced to live in vehicles, it doesn't really stack up in a utilitarian sense.
The house isn't being lived in, rental income could easily pay for temporary accommodation, or it could be shared with roommates etc.
This isn't my area but I feel like they might be kind of easy to define. They're wrappers around their inner companies. I'm sure nothing has been done because pretty much every corpo lobbyist represents a company that uses them.
sure, but I don't even know how to differentiate between copying my brain and being in a coma, or just falling asleep really deeply. waking up sometimes feels like enough of a discontinuity
In my experience, lots of stuff needs to scale massively, but (outside of the better tech companies I guess?) mainstream tools/stacks/approaches are hangovers from n-tier arch days and not really right for it, so the majority of distributed systems are tyre fires.
Quite likely that someone on your wifi, or someone with whom you share videos, is clicking on those. The algo gives you recommendations from other people.
IMO Android UX is pretty great, for a personal computing device. YouTube's UX is also pretty great, for an ad delivery network. It succeeds at showing you ads.
YouTube doesn't really care if the search function gives you the right or wrong search result. Totally irrelevant as long as you click something, anything and your eyeballs are on the next ad. YouTube is optimised for keeping you watching ... literally anything... as long as they can play you some ads, preferably expensive ads.
Sounds about right. I did read a study or something where people figured that consciousness gives us a believable illusion of free will, but in fact it's more like an observer of whatever I/O the brain performs and stitches everything together post-hoc.
>I'm sorry for any confusion, but it seems there might be some mix-up in your query. The year 1979 does not have a widely recognized event matching your description, and "TS" and "Cydonia" do not correspond to any known geopolitical locations or events in historical records. "Cydonia" is often associated with a region on Mars that has been subject to various conspiracy theories, but it doesn't relate to any political events or protests.
>If you're referring to a specific historical event, it could possibly be the Tian