I read so many docs when I was trying to implement OAuth and got more and more confused. This video was a huge help though for explaining all of the concepts:
We use poetry just for development, but run Docker containers in prod. When the image gets built we just create a requirements.txt (poetry export --format requirements.txt --output requirements.txt), copy that into the image, and pip install. Because this is built using the poetry lock file, it'll always be exactly the same unless we specifically update something with poetry.
I used to work at a place that was just using requirements.txt files that only included our direct dependencies. There was a project that needed updating after not being touched for a couple of years. The requirements.txt didn't change, but when we built the project again, some of the transitive dependencies used a newer version, and a bug was introduced from one of those updates. A bunch of time was wasted tracking down the issue, pinning the old version of the transitive dependency, and figuring out the damage caused by the bug.
As a result, the requirements.txt was changed to also include transitive dependencies. We had vulnerability scanning on our code, and it found a severe issue with one of the transitive dependencies, but there wasn't a version of that library with the issue fixed yet. Time was spent looking into this to see how we could be impacted. As it turns out, it was a transitive dependency for a library that we no longer used and removed from the project months ago. When you create your requirements.txt by running pip freeze > requirements.txt, you don't have an easy way of knowing which library requires which transitive dependency.
There's ways you can fix this using multiple requirements.txt files, but at that point it's a lot easier to use poetry, especially if you want to keep your development dependencies separate.
That was excellent but stopped tantalizingly short - he's on to something. He's uncomfortable about the concept of a "soul", but the idea of continuity is really interesting. It suggests that the boundary of a conscious entity is not purely physical, but must also encompass a temporal dimension. (This is a new thought for me, I'm excited by it.) It's a shame he felt icky about souls because you don't really need that baggage.
I'm not smart enough to really think it through but at a glance it seems to resolve those various tests and scenarios. In the malfunctioning teleport example (where the cell destroyer fails to fire), _both_ London Tim and Boston Tim are equally alive because they share the past: the teleport has succeeded in bifurcating their consciousness. Same with the split-brain twins (though you'd expect the results to be diminished).
I also like the start but it stop way before it get really interesting. I found Permutation City (by Greg Egan) to a great deal deeper, plus it's a nice story. I mentioned this also somewhere else in this thread. Tbh when people start with the soul concept or even mention it as a possibility, I usually stop reading because you start with some un-provable hypothesis that only adds unnecessary complexity. I've yet to run into a thought experiment that arrives at the concept of a soul through structured arguments (and not say religious arguments).
That's just it: jumping from discussions of the biological repository of consciousness straight to souls might be missing a whole big area.
These thought experiments got me thinking about how a conscious entity might better be considered as its "world line", not just its instantaneous physical embodiment. Call that a soul if you want, but there's no particular reason to.
I’d considered the situations in the article, but I do wonder - if you replace 10% of someone with identical particles then they are the same. 20%, 30%, etc then yes the same. But. 80%? Sure. Replace limbs and body and I can see that. But what about splitting the brain (as in article) where you don’t even need 50% for continuity.
But we effectively always get back the the ship of Theseus, and circling back to Trek,
Does Data have a soul? I don't know that he has. I don't know that I have. But I have got to give him the freedom to explore that question himself.
TFA talks a bit about that. The short of it is kinda as I was discussing above - if you consider the entity temporally as well as spatially, the Trigger's Broom/Ship of Theseus problem becomes moot.
Oh, this segues nicely from my DST, my favorite bikeshedding topic into my second favorite one!
Base 12 is better than decimal in every way. It divides cleanly by 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 12. Compare that to decimal, where you have 1, 2, 5, 10. It's much better for scheduling. With decimal you couldn't have a nice, clean schedule for a factory with 3 shifts per day for example. 60 minutes (which is a multiple of 12) gives you a lot of ways to break up an hour, vs 100 minutes.
I had a friend once rant about how we should switch everything to base 12. It's obviously crazy given the effort vs reward, but I think we would have been better off to have done so way back when.
It would have probably been better, but it's an utterly fundamental change. It's like changing time zones, switching to decimal time, getting rid of DST, changing measurement systems from whatever to metric and learning a new language at the same time.
Base 10 is so embedded in what we do, that a switch to base 12 is the kind of thing that would be done when we rebuild civilization after the first alien attack :-)
Yup, I'm a big believer in applying the rule of three ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_three_(computer_progra... ) for moving code into a library as well. I find if I create an API with just one or two examples in mind, it often doesn't turn out to be as general as I thought it would be. By the time I've done something three times, I have a much better idea of what the different use cases will be.
Me too! I spent Christmas there many years ago, and every person I talked to asked:
1. Are you going back home for Christmas?
2. No? Oh are you going to get a Christmas cake from KFC?
I was like, Christmas cake? And why KFC specifically? My confusion confused them just as much. Maybe they later thought it was because I was Canadian so it must just be an American thing.
The reverse version of this is pretty sobering: Japanese or Chinese person makes it to Canada, and excitedly goes to the nearest KFC or McDonald's, and gets culture shock from how run-down it is. Especially if they're downtown in a big city.
It makes you want to drive them two hours out to a small-town fast-food restaurant to show them that indeed, a clean and tidy KFC/McDonald's does exist somewhere in America.
I wish more companies had this, it's really useful.
I looked into applying at Gitlab, but was able to easily find out their location adjustment and avoided wasting my time or theirs. Unfortunately they pay less in a high cost of living Canadian city than for someone living in Alabama.
