> Most of the modest peasants, men or women, very often still small artisans, small weavers or textile workers, peddlers, boatmen or carriers in bad seasons, could become day laborers on nearby farms and estates, if they had the build and stamina, once their own work was done. Some were even regular day laborers, familiar to a domain steward or a village ploughman, present all year round or usually required for a certain number of tasks. Certain harvest tasks were sometimes carried out if possible part of the night, or continuously by successive teams[5].
> Day laborers, brewers or laborers, represented a significant part of the population and sometimes lived, in the absence of family support or a solidarity house, on the edge of begging[8]. In rural areas, they subsisted thanks to additional agricultural work with ploughmen or farm merchants but also thanks to wool spinning, crafts or transport. They also served as additional labor in construction, helped the lumberjacks, made bundles, etc. Women did laundry or took children in as wet nurses[9].
I don't even disagree with you, but your way of argumenting is terrible and actively deterring people from your point that union are a core component of a healthy free market.
If your point is to score virtue point, keep at it, but if you actually want to change anyone mind, avoid terms like "is hard to start educating you", it just makes you sound like a douche
I was being very honest, it is hard to start educating someone coming from that position since there is so much bullshit wrapped around a statement like "unions are just corporate blackmailing" which is hard to pull apart without knowing how the person came to that conclusion.
I don't even think it's possible to change someone's mind who already think that way, since it's purely from a point of absolute ignorance and I'm not willing to put enough effort to cite literature that could give them good starting points to understand something they are very likely not even willing to start understanding. They have a lazy position, I reply lazily.
They have an ideological position, based on ignorance, and from a single statement it's pretty clear they aren't curious and willing to change their mind.
Hence why I cite to look into how unions work in the Nordics, at least that is a starting point if they want to learn more about labour movements. It takes someone being curious though.
In the end, it was absolutely honest: it is hard to start educating someone who holds that position a priori and based on pure ignorance, and if not ignorance it's maliciousness, there's not much of a spectrum in this case.
The reason absolutely matter : a mistake can happen to anyone, and be fixed within a short time, while censorship is deliberate and will probably not be fixed
If a 'mistake' keeps happening for two years, then it is realistically not a mistake. This is not Musk!twitter's first 'mistake' of this nature, by a long shot.
Ok, I see what you mean and I agree with you, it would not be a first time a company pulls this kind of trick.
But in this case it's not that the reason does not matter, it's that the reason is censorship/bad faith competition, and is obfuscated behind a mistake
Legit question: How would you test something like this? It's not like you can have automated tests with million of random links. And these URLs are certainly not hardcoded.
Compare the results between the current code and the proposed version. Analyze what the new version blocks that the current one doesn't and vice versa. Have logging that shows which factor(s) were applied in the actions taken. Determine if the outcomes are in line with the intended goals.
This can be accomplished in a few ways. You could accumulate real URLs and build a test set that you can run in non-prod environments prior to deploy. You could also deploy the new version alongside the current version, both watching the live data, with the current version retaining enforcement power while the new version is in log-only mode.
In the case of automated systems that might create new actions in response to live traffic, anomaly detection can be used to look for significant changes in classification and/or rate of actions, spikes in actions against specific domains, etc.
Unit tests with a text fixture of every URL format you can think of, and every time one breaks your e.g. parser, you add it and some permutations to the list. Eventually, you have a vast file with tons of nasty edge cases to ensure that your e.g. parser is robust and reliable.
You cannot. Because these aren't simple "URL parsers" or such. They commonly use heuristics, bayesian logic and complex statistics (the word AI has become so conflated with LLMs and GPTs, and infected with politics, but it is a form of AI).
The output isn't reproducible, not even predictable. The whole idea of a system like this is that it adapts. If only by simply collecting more data to "do the stats on".
What systems like this need, is different layers towards which stuff is leveraged. This is how your spam folder in your mailbox works too (to some extend). Basically: if it's clearly spam, just /dev/null it, if its clearly not spam let it pass. Everything inbetween will be re-rated by another layer which then does the same etc. One or more of these layers can and should be humans. The actions of these humans then train the system. If gmail isn't certain something is spam, it'll deliver it to your spam folder, or maybe even to your inbox. For you to review and mark as ham or spam manually.
Knowing that Elon fired a lot of teams of humans that fact-checked, researched fake news, a lot of it manually, I'd not be surprised if exactly the "human layers" were simply removed. Leaving a system that's not tuned nor checked while running.
(Source: I've built spam/malware/bot etc detection for comment sections of large sites)
> It's not like you can have automated tests with million of random links.
Why not? They were already filtering millions of random links with the existing system. Saving some of those results to run regressions against before making changes to critical infrastructure should be trivial.
> Security researchers at Mysk first noticed the issue on Sunday night, Feb. 16. They reached out to me via DM and we were able to confirm the various different ways (DM, post, profile bio, etc.) that X was blocking “Signal.me” links.
It's much better to have _nothing_ than the wrong _something_, since with a wrong _something_ you build assumptions on wrong premises.
Much better to accept that we don't know (hopefully temporarily), so that people can keep looking into it instead of falsely believing the problem is solved
So as far as I can tell, this is basically a more modern Flask. It pulls in design lessons from FastAPI, but it's still more batteries included such as templating (jinja2) and authentication.
Neat, but tbh I am very bearish on Python's future beyond APIs - templating html in Python is a terrible idea for anything larger than a hobby site, when you can have an API-first app with a React+Typescript frontend.
And if you need more than FastAPI, you might as well use django-ninja and get the full Django ecosystem at your disposal.
For Django, there's also django-bridge. This lets you build React apps that are backed by Django views/routing. You can also use Django's built-in authentication and forms which isn't easy with APIs.
There is no canned way to do it in one shot, but using regular Django session authentication together with a PWA frontend hosted separately is not that difficult.
The actual authentication remains on the Django app, using the standard way of POSTing to a login form and receiving a session cookie -- only instead of a server-generated page serving a HTML form, you have the PWA lipstick sending data directly. This approach is so much simpler than dealing with id/access/refresh tokens, encryption keys, black lists, and all of the OIDC dance.
HTML-based templating is toxic to a codebase, especially django templating. It is untyped, impossible to compile and trust, and it's horrible to maintain.
Use React and JSX (TSX, to be more specific). NextJS does good quality SSR, use that if you want an app that is also usable without JS.
Anybody not in that ecosystem /right now/ is going to be lagging behind by so much in velocity and capability, and will get eaten by competition.
I agree that HTML templating is toxic. But there are other ways, like htpy or htmy etc. Basically server side HTML rendering. This is what makes me interested in focused frameworks like this.
As a non-native speaker, 'to be wary' is not really in my vocabulary, while 'to be weary' seems much more common, and both sound pretty close to each other even if there is a difference even with my accent, so I could see myself making the mistake.
It looks similar to than/then, but than/then is much more jarring to me for some reason.
> "People in Europe are white" is really something you just hear from people without any European historical culture, and/or people wanting to sell a racist ideology
There's of course a lot of cross-communication with other continents, from the muslim conquest of the Iberian peninsula to the Ottoman wars in eastern Europe, and the colonizing empires.
But the European history is very strongly predominantly white, and pretending otherwise is something you only hear from politically oriented people, unless you try to push ridiculous ideas like 'Italians are not white' as I've seen here and there
> European history is of course very strongly predominantly white
"White" ?
In the context of the thinking in Europe at the time of Verne .. what is "white"?
eg: The Races of Europe: A Sociological Study (1899) - Ripley
Ripley classified Europeans into three distinct races: Teutonic [..] Mediterranean [..] Alpine [..]
Ripley's tripartite system of race put him at odds both with others on the topic of human difference, including those who insisted that there was only one European race, and those who insisted that there were at least ten European races (such as Joseph Deniker, whom Ripley saw as his chief rival).
You're talking about the general history of Europe, and the vision in our current culture, why are you trying to push an obsolete taxonomy "of the time" ?
> "People in Europe are white" is really something you just hear from people without any European historical culture, and/or people wanting to sell a racist ideology
That's clearly talking about current notions, and not "current in the times of Jules Vernes"
Your request for me to "read more carefully" is very much unwelcome : stand by your own writing instead of trying to shift the meaning
> That's clearly talking about current notions, and ...
written by somebody other than myself.
> Your request for me to "read more carefully" is
again restated. Please read more carefully, pay attention to who said what, and don't falsely take the wrong people to task over what other people said.
We all make mistakes, perhaps you can now recognise and acknowledge yours.
"White" is a fictional category, and it is an empty one at that. "White" and "Black" were invented in the Colony of Virginia to keep African and Irish/Scottish slaves apart and from uniting against their masters. To accomplish this end, "white" slaves were given the privilege of being whipped with their shirts on. This was enough to create a feeling of privilege among the "white" slaves and a feeling of resentment among the "black" slaves. Sound familiar?
Eventually, "Black American" actually became a real cultural identity, and in some sense an indigenous ethnic group that formed in the US among the descendants of African slaves (who, usually, also have some European ancestry). Nothing analogous occurred for "White American". There is no "White American" as an ethnic or cultural identity. It's a completely negative notion defined in terms of what it is not. This is why the whole "white boy" phenomenon we're seeing today is preposterously silly. It's not an identity. There is no "white culture". "Black" on its own is not an authentic identity either, unless it is short for "Black American. Black American culture has little to do with Africa, even if some elements of their culture have remote African inspiration or roots.
The "white boy" phenomenon is just a sad result of the loss of ethnic and religious identity. The US is a country especially prone to this issue. The first wave of European immigrants formed ethnic enclaves. With each passing generation, the likelihood of intermarriage, especially with members of the same religion, increased. Over time, ethnic identity is watered down to such a degree that the only remaining identity is religious identity. So, in the US, religious identity played a double role as both ethnic and religious identity. Now, as religious identity has eroded under the incessant pressures of liberal hyperindividualism, people are grasping at something that can given them a sense of identity. This is one reason for the rise of various ideologies, sexual and racial ideologies. So, in this case, the "white boy" is basically a kid with some kind of European ancestry who has no ethnic or religious identity who has latched onto this "white" label in an attempt to make up for having neither.
So, what Europeans had in common was a broadly Christian identity, not "whiteness", whatever that even means. Yes, the peoples of Europe tend to have less skin pigment, they tend to have different shaped noses, different phenotypes, but this is not a cultural or ethnic identity. Having blue eyes or brown eyes is not a cultural identity. These are the kinds of features that people latch onto when they don't have or have a weak ethnic identity.
Google trad of a couple paragraphs :
> Most of the modest peasants, men or women, very often still small artisans, small weavers or textile workers, peddlers, boatmen or carriers in bad seasons, could become day laborers on nearby farms and estates, if they had the build and stamina, once their own work was done. Some were even regular day laborers, familiar to a domain steward or a village ploughman, present all year round or usually required for a certain number of tasks. Certain harvest tasks were sometimes carried out if possible part of the night, or continuously by successive teams[5].
> Day laborers, brewers or laborers, represented a significant part of the population and sometimes lived, in the absence of family support or a solidarity house, on the edge of begging[8]. In rural areas, they subsisted thanks to additional agricultural work with ploughmen or farm merchants but also thanks to wool spinning, crafts or transport. They also served as additional labor in construction, helped the lumberjacks, made bundles, etc. Women did laundry or took children in as wet nurses[9].