sleep_deprived

@sleep_deprived@lemmy.world

This is a remote user, information on this page may be incomplete. View at Source ↗

⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Know Nut November⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:
It was honestly just dumb luck. I had heard of these previously from a friend who had some in the Philippines. I would say, really, I do know nothing about nuts, relatively speaking :)
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Know Nut November⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:
Yes, but not normal walnuts, black walnuts. What most people think of as walnuts, at least where I’m from, come from the Persian/English walnut tree, Juglans Regia.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Know Nut November⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:
Green almonds, right?
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Know Nut November⁩ ⁨⁨6⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago⁩:
Pili nut?
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Microsoft donates the Mono Project to the Wine team⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:
Well they said .NET Framework, and I also wouldn’t be surprised if they more or less wrapped that up - .NET Framework specifically means the old implementation of the CLR, and it’s been pretty much superseded by an implementation just called .NET, formerly known as .NET Core (definitely not confusing at all, thanks Microsoft). .NET Framework was only written for Windows, hence the need for Mono/Xamarin on other platforms. In contrast, .NET is cross-platform by default.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Can you help me with my JavaScript issue?⁩ ⁨⁨8⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:
The issue is that, in the function passed to reduce, you’re adding each object directly to the accumulator rather than to its intended parent. These are the problem lines:
```
if (index == array.length - 1) {
	accumulator[val] = value;
} else if (!accumulator.hasOwnProperty(val)) {
	accumulator[val] = {}; // update the accumulator object
}
```
There’s no pretty way (that I can think of at least) to do what you want using methods like reduce in vanilla JS, so I’d suggest using a for loop instead - especially if you’re new to programming. Something along these lines (not written to be actual code, just to give you an idea):
```
let curr = settings;
const split = url.split("/");
for (let i = 0; i &lt; split.length: i++) {
    const val = split[i];
    if (i != split.length-1) {
        //add a check to see if curr[val] exists
        let next = {};
        curr[val] = next;
        curr = next;
    }
    //add else branch
}
```
It’s missing some things, but the important part is there - every time we move one level deeper in the URL, we update curr so that we keep our place instead of always adding to the top level.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨xkcd #2876: Range Safety⁩ ⁨⁨10⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:
I assume they’re reffering to the fact that China dumps spent rocket stages over land and one recently landed in a relatively populated area.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Is jQuery still the go-to JS helper library?⁩ ⁨⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:
Yeah personally I haven’t needed jQuery in years.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨AAAAtoms⁩ ⁨⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:
As an American this is how I feel. I don’t mind Fahrenheit but for absolutely everything else I desperately wish we’d switch.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Rest in Plasma⁩ ⁨⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:
I learned that after reading this xkcd and then the list. Which was concerningly recently.

I guess on the bright side it was the only misconception on the list that I had.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Rivian blames “fat finger” for infotainment-bricking software update⁩ ⁨⁨11⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago⁩:
The issue is not just that a bad update went out. Freak accidents can happen. Software is complicated and you can never be 100% sure. The problem is the specifics. A fat finger should never be able to push a bad update to a system in customers’ hands, forget a system easily capable of killing people in a multitude of ways. I’m not quite as critical as the above commentor but this is a serious issue that should raise major questions about their culture and procedures.

This isn’t just some website where a fat finger at worst means the site is down for a while (assuming you do the bare minimum and back up your db). This is a vehicle. That’s what they meant about the CAN bus - not that that’s really a concern when the infotainment system just gets bricked, but that they have such lax procedures around software that touches a safety-critical system.

Having systems in place to ensure only tested, known good builds are pushed is pretty damn basic safety practice. Swiss cheese model. If they can’t even handle the basics, what other bad practices do they have?

Again, not that I think this is necessarily as bad as the other person - perhaps this is the only mistake they’ve made in their safety procedures and otherwise they’re industry leaders - we don’t know that yet. But this is extremely concerning and until proven otherwise should be investigated and treated as a very serious safety violation. Safety first.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Scientists confirm that the first black hole ever imaged is actually spinning⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
Yes.
⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨New Nintendo patent suggests Switch 2 may solve joycon drift⁩ ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago⁩:
It’s a way to detect which way the stick is pointing using magnets. It’s way more accurate and incredibly reliable.