I’m also interested in what you think can become best practices where we can have (auto-scaling) worker instances that can pick up DBOS workflows and execute them.
Do you think an app’s (e.g. FastAPI) backend should be the DBOS Client, submitting workflows to the DBOS instance? And then we can have multiple DBOS instances with each picking up jobs from a queue?
Yeah, I think in that case you should have auto-scaling DBOS workers all pulling from a queue and a FastAPI backend using the DBOS client to submit jobs to the queue.
I received an email this morning where someone created an issue in a public repo with a title containing a racial slur and mentioning a bunch of users, including me. This is just one example as far as I know.
These spammers also spammed threats to Codeberg users that maintain projects that advocate for human rights, trans rights, etc and collect facts/data against hate and discrimination. The content of those threats are how we know those spammers are far-right forces. The spam email notification was just a side-thing the spammers did to get more attention.
I feel like this kind of statement requires a little more details to back it up.
And, to use a hot take here, I believe that the "left to right" political axis can be simplified using a "I believe I am better than X" statement, where X is a set of people(s), that grows ever wider the further right you go.
Therefore a person on the "far left" of the axis would complete the sentence as "I believe I am better than nobody" and thus it's not really plausible that they would need slurs to talk about others.
I realize that this sounds a little of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy, but people saying they are something, does not make them that something unless backed up by actions/beliefs. Using slurs is antithetic to being any kind of left, not just "far", so I suspect you might have met someone confused about things.
Yeah you're right. Far left people use slurs like "capitalist" and "billionaire" and have calls to violence like "eat the rich", I forgot. I'm not sure if they're really as offensive as the ones that we initially talked about though. (Also, I have no idea who those two(three?) people are.)
You are forgetting all the ways you can act as if you are superior to others other than by using nasty words. You are also forgetting a lot of commonly used insults from the far left: fascist, nazi, racist, sexist, bigot, bootlicker, tech bro, and so on and so forth.
Some on the hard left put a large focus on controlling the use of language. They are the arbiters of what is offensive, etc. Those "guides to inclusive language" that made the rounds a few years ago were perfect examples. You can't say blacklist or totem pole or "no can do". You can't say kowtow or gyp or "master branch". What is insisting you control the language of others except acting as it you are morally superior to them? Generally speaking, wokeness/political correctness is exactly that: acting as if you are better than others and your moral pronouncements (no pun intended) should take precedence over theirs, because of your superior moral authority.
I feel like those are less insults and slurs and more statements of perception. The only problem is when they get dispatched indiscriminately against everyone, when you're completely right. They've been so overused that they lose meaning.
However, I have to say it again, being called a boot-liker and a tech-bro does not bear the weight of a couple of centuries of slavery behind it. Maybe "nazi" would have a similarly charged undertone, but again, if someone tells me that I'm a nazi, I check my behaviour for what might have made them say that and then just stop being a nazi. It's not subtle being a nazi, or a fascist, or a sexist or a bigot.
Racist slurs can not be corrected for, you can not sit down reflect on your life and stop being Black, Hispanic, Asian or Middle-Eastern. But you can if you're a nazi.
Being called a "bootlicker" or a "techbro" is rude. No slurs have "centuries" of anything "behind" them. They are just rude, often very rude.
If someone tells me I am a Nazi, I don't need to "check" if I am one. I know already that I am not. The same is true of the rest of those terms. Yet I have been called a "neofascist" on HN quite recently. These terms are bandied about indiscriminately to mean "person I disagree with". They are just used as slurs. Even if the meaning of these terms shifted by usage over time to refer to something I did or thought, that wouldn't make the behaviour or view bad. They are labels, and they are insults because they label bad behaviour and views. But if they shifted by usage to start labelling good or neutral behaviour or views they would need to become good or neutral terms, as difficult as that would be, because otherwise you give people the power to determine what you do and think by shifting the meaning of words to which cultural weight is attached.
Easier is to steadfastly refuse to allow their meanings to shift. No, you are not a fascist for thinking police forces are necessary. You are not sexist for believing that men and women are different. You are not racist for wanting immigration law to be enforced. etc.
> You are not sexist for believing that men and women are different. You are not racist for wanting immigration law to be enforced.
You are a misogynist if you think that those differences between men and women need to be underscored through societal and politic measures against women. You are racist if you think that kicking immigrants out of your country means only the brown people (which sadly seems to be a trap you eagerly walked yourself into). So please.
I haven't walked into any traps. People get insulted as racist all the time when they haven't said anything about race.
People called GitHub racist for having a contract with ICE.
People call you racist if you say "immigration law should be enforced".
That is my entire point and your immediate assumption that I have fallen into a "trap" and must be a secret cryptoracist is exactly the behaviour I am talking about.
As for the differences being "underscored through measures against women", that is just stupid. There are differences and there are as a result social and legal distinctions drawn between men and women. Women are much more vulnerable to violence from men than the reverse. Single-sex spaces are a requirement as a result. This is a very basic example. The accommodations that employment law and social expectations need to make for women because of pregnancy is another example: you can't just say "we treat men and women the same: you are expected to lift heavy things at work" when you have a pregnant employee.
Literally my whole point is that some on the left eagerly take any opportunity they can get to assume bad faith and apply these insults to as many people as they can. You have then immediately done exactly that. So please. Your pathetic argument that this is just "descriptive" is ridiculous. You choose to interpret things in the worst possible light and to invent things I never said so that you can call me a racist misogynist. Don't pretend that you don't or that you are some neutral observer of people.
If a person is acting like a right-wing asshole, I’m going to assume they are a right-wing asshole. If they don’t like that, they should change their behavior.
These forces made spam accounts that spammed threats/insults in issue trackers and pull requests on projects that collect facts and resources against hate and discrimination and advocate for human rights, trans rights, etc on Codeberg. Some of the same spam accounts were behind the spam notification emails.
Also, because of the timing of the DDoS attack, they are likely be behind the DDoS attack as well, although that's not for sure. So we know they're far-right forces because of what they said in their threats to Codeberg users. The blog post mentions this but doesn't explicitly list the projects that were threatened so they don't continue to get spammed.
They want to feel validated with identity politics first and foremost. Creating additional distance from the bad words so people who care about identity politics are comforted.
Moving from Java to Python for the preferred backend language many many years ago was a relief: building prototypes faster, no need to mention obvious types (int, bool, string) anywhere. In some places using (data) classes and I had robust programs. When doing type mistakes, running the program or having unit tests exactly told me where I had it wrong - no need for type annotations to enjoy programming, right?
But now over the last years, I happen to prefer changing programs a lot without running them a lot. I often do code refactorings over multiple commits, being highly concentrated, without running the code once. And then only running the code only 1 hour or 2 later. Such a pleasant activity! Just writing, reading, writing, thinking code. No ugly and long stack traces, no need to input user data into input fields, just reading and changing the program code, with the editor in full screen.
And guess what I highly started to appreciate, after many years of Python! Type annotations! With type annotations a LSP would immediately underline any mistake I would accidentally make, and that made me feel much more comfortable and secure about my changes, over several commits, touching 100s of lines without ever running the program. I suddenly learned to understand, after many years of dynamic type less programming with Python, that I can get more easily and for much longer into a flow state when I add annotations and run a LSP live over my code while I work on it.
Big fan of Digital Ocean App Platform here.
Deploying, running and scaling containers is so easy and their very good abstractions and tooling are worth the money.
We've got satellites that can measure the inflow and outflow of radiation and see an imbalance.
We've got spectrographs that can look at that radiation to see which radiation is not balanced. We can see that what is happening is radiation coming in at wavelengths that the atmosphere doesn't block heats things which reradiate much of that energy as infrared which the atmosphere blocks.
Thanks to spectroscopy we know that it is CO₂ in the atmosphere that is largely responsible for this blocking.
We know that the increase in CO₂ levels over the last couple of hundred years is largely from fossil fuels rather than things like decaying vegetation, forest fires, animal respiration and flatulence, or volcanic gases because of isotope ratios in atmospheric CO₂.
CO₂ from living things or recently living things contains ¹⁴C. CO₂ from fossil fuels and volcanoes does not contain ¹⁴C. CO₂ from volcanoes contains a higher ratio of ¹³C to ¹²C than the ratio in atmospheric CO₂. CO₂ from fossil fuels contains a lower ratio of ¹³C to ¹²C than the ratio in atmospheric CO₂.
That allows scientists to look at the isotope ratios in the atmosphere and figure out how much of the CO₂ there came from fossil fuels and how much came from volcanoes. The result is that most of the increase is from fossil fuels.
As a sanity check that result also matches well with the amount of CO₂ that we'd expect to have been released based on the amount of known fossil fuel use.
"Now that we have succeeded in capturing the natural climate variability, we can see that the projected anthropogenic warming will be much greater than that.”
That does not seem to support your claim of "natural rise".
"A continuous record of the past 66 million years shows natural climate variability due to changes in Earth’s orbit around the sun is much smaller than projected future warming due to greenhouse gas emissions."
“Now that we have succeeded in capturing the natural climate variability, we can see that the projected anthropogenic warming will be much greater than that.”
"For the past 3 million years, Earth’s climate has been in an Icehouse state characterized by alternating glacial and interglacial periods. Modern humans evolved during this time, but greenhouse gas emissions and other human activities are now driving the planet toward the Warmhouse and Hothouse climate states not seen since the Eocene epoch, which ended about 34 million years ago."
Please read the article you're linking. Unless this is an awkwardly executed joke that I'm missing?
I'm not sure if this link is intended to contradict or reinforce the image from the previous link. The text of that link indicates that the research concluded that the Earth is currently much warmer than it ought to be given known natural processes.
The +1.5°C cannot be attributed to the natural transition from an ice age. It is happening way too fast compared to the thousands of years the Milankovitch cycle operates on. Also, you're conveniently ignoring the fact that, if anything, the climate should be getting cooler, not hotter, as we are entering an ice age, not exiting one[1].
That mammals were not in existence for the larger part of that very warm period. So the fact that life existed through it has little bearing on human civilization thriving through a similar one, as parent seemed to imply.
Let's, I am not afraid of the earth getting much warmer, I see it as mostly fear mongering. If it's really getting _that_ hot that we mammals can't survive, then let that be it. There's the notorious idea of some humans that we can control everything. Let's continue keeping the earth a clean, healthy space, let's stop producing so much waste, let's clean the water, I am all in. But to believe that we are heating up the earth, I'm glad that not all agree to that nonsense.
> But to believe that we are heating up the earth, I'm glad that not all agree to that nonsense.
We are not heating up the earth.
The sun is heating up the earth.
That's occurring as we are adding 11 billion tonnes per year of additional insulation to the atmosphere. That's like throwing more blankets on the bed, trapping more heat.
This is well documented. The gas properties are understood and can be demonstrated in science labs to children. The gas sources are well understood and derive from documented fossil fuel extraction and confirmed by both isotope records and now by orbiting satellites.
