There are countless examples of people finding evidence of ancient peoples who were capable of great engineering feats like pyramids and other structures with simple tools and techniques. To state that aliens must have played in their construction is, to put it mildly, arrogant. (I'm a lot of cases, culturally chauvinistic and/or racist)

Agreed. Why couldn't we simply have had a pre-existing Earth civilization that arose, developed technology/industry, and faded away, leaving only resilient megalithic traces?

There is ZERO evidence for such a civilization. Especially because there are no resilient megalithic traces in the first place. Megaliths we see are only 5-6 thousand years old and have a lot of matching real evidence about people who built them and how they did it.

And they:

- Didn't affect the atmosphere in any way. - Had all their buildings were recorded as being built by a people we know much about in specific timelines we know much about, which aligns with archeological artifacts. - Made sure none of their lithics stayed. - Used no fuel source. - Did no mining of any kind. - Never used anything but stone and paper machete for building (because even wood structures leave identifiable patterns for potentially thousands of years). - Only used that stone for a couple buildings, which they planned for the cultures that didn't exist to use intimately. - Had their bones dissolved without a trace.

All we have to do is remove any type of evidence-based science and anything is possible!

Speaking as someone who lives near Amish country, with friends who enjoy carriage racing... Yes, lots of people do.

It's not certain that much knowledge has been lost, although much of it is in "endangered" status of preservation. There's a kind of silk netting made from the hairlike tufts of a certain species of clams, only practiced by two people IIRC.

Some lost knowledge is being rediscovered. A well-known example is making Damascus steel; it's now so ordinary you can order it online.

What? We build skyscrapers and supersonic jets and computer chips with nanometer precision now. We haven't "lost" anything. This is just blind worship to some ancient, primitive knowledge that never existed. The past 10,000 years has just been normal people living normal lives.

And, yes, I feel confident that with a few weeks, a rope, and a really good reason - almost any American could strap a horse to a buggy. It's not rocket science and countless humans have done it before.

Flock doesn't fight crime, it documents the travel of people without a reason.

It and other ALPR systems real-time alert on things like stolen cars. In my home county they have arrested and convicted criminals due to this. That is fighting crime, by definition.

If it was such a bad idea, they shouldn't have installed them in Redmond. Turning them off now because some people assumed things that weren't true is idiocy and sets a bad precedent.

Yeah, but. The side-effect of catching criminals and protecting the children is that they also provide a searchable database of everyone's historical travel habits.

It's my opinion that our historical ideas of expectation of privacy when in public spaces are incompatible with the current state of surveillance technology. Sure, everyone should expect that they might be recognized by an acquaintance when out in public, but I don't think it follows that our entire past history should be available at any time in the future.

If we made a mistake, we should fix it.

Sometimes it takes an actual bad outcome for people to realize that the potential problems weren’t theoretical.

But there wasn't an actual bad outcome. Did anyone read the article? It was all a coincidence.

The article said University of Washington researchers released a report Oct. 21 showing federal immigration agencies like ICE and Border Patrol had accessed the data of at least 18 Washington cities, often without their police departments’ knowing.

The bad outcome is now a much more real possibility than before, and very front and center.

They just need to be context aware, or call context-aware things.

Ok so no magic goroutine interruption, just contexts all the way down.

Still, this is nicer than hand-rolling a WG every time.

When said app authors use a private library that a Apple asked them to not use, is it really wrong to blame them?

From a Windows end-user perspective, the entity to blame for apps breaking after a Windows upgrade is Microsoft, even if the app was doing something it should not have [0].

[0] Search for "return policy" on https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2004/06/13/how-microsoft-lost... .

It made my menu bar transparent until you click an item in it, rendering it useless on my black background.

Thank you, I suspected as much, I use a black background as well.

I have code that wouldn't work without embedding. Basically, I have a type that annotates any AWS paginate and is capable of streaming all the results as a sequence. It embeds the original client so you get all the functionality of the client, but it also wraps the functions that support a pagination. I can't think of an easier or clearer way to do it.

My E46 had frameless windows and it was similar, as you pulled the handle it would lower the window slightly, and after closing, it would scooch up a bit.

He had a photo of one in Shift, page 899.

I'll have to read the rest later but this was an unforced error on the author's part. There is nothing unclear about that block of code. If err isn't but, it was set, and we're no longer in the function. If it's not, why waste an interface handle?

You can start a new scope with `{}` in go. If I have a bunch of temp vars I'll declare the final result outside the braces and then do the work inside. But lately days I'll just write a function. It's clearer and easier to test.