"We did make C better, but what you're getting back from us isn't the better thing."
🙂
"We did make C better, but what you're getting back from us isn't the better thing."
🙂
Simple and just works
def fetch_html(self, url):
domain = urllib.parse.urlparse(url).netloc
if domain not in self.robot_parsers:
rp = urllib.robotparser.RobotFileParser()
rp.set_url(f'https://{domain}/robots.txt')
rp.read()
self.robot_parsers[domain] = rp
rp = self.robot_parsers[domain]
if not rp.can_fetch(self.user_agent, url):
print(f"Fetching not allowed by robots.txt: {url}")
return None
if self.last_fetch_time:
time_since_last_fetch = time.time() - self.last_fetch_time
if time_since_last_fetch < self.delay:
time.sleep(self.delay - time_since_last_fetch)
headers = {'User-Agent': self.user_agent}
response = requests.get(url, headers=headers)
self.last_fetch_time = time.time()
if response.status_code == 200:
return response.text
else:
print(f"Failed to fetch {url}: {response.status_code}")
return None
Randomly selected something from a project I'm working on that's simple and just works. Show me less than 300 lines of .NET to do the same, and I would be somewhat surprised.
Yeah
I could maybe see it, if all you know otherwise is C++, and your experience with other languages is trying to make python / go / node / whatever work well on a Windows machine without well-working tooling, and then you finally try C# and it's like oh shit, it's not filling up my mouth with feces every time I want to iterate over a dictionary or need memory management, this is a big improvement, I like it
But, VSCode has good support for those other languages now anyway
And, the bigger question, who the fuck are all these people upvoting this
Like what do you guys do all day? Or is this some subtle super sophisticated joke I am not understanding, or do you just like the man's chin? Or do you just not program and you upvote programming things out of general excitement about the idea of doing programming?
Who in the fuck is this excited about C# of all the things in the world to get excited about?
I'm just baffled in general by it
As weird as it sounds, this actually isn't true in general. Except on baby formula, it's not required by federal law. Some states require it and some don't, but it's more or less put there voluntarily by everyone because they don't want spoiled stuff going around with their name on it.
The UN report allegations also pertain to the festival.
Quick question, since you're clearly familiar with the report: Section III(c)1 is divided into 6 different subsections, of which the first is the festival and surrounding areas. What are the other 5 subsections?
I can start to give some hints if you have trouble answering this question. There's also III(c)2 and 3 but I already asked some questions about III(c)2.
(That was another hint, a big one, to one of my earlier questions you still seem to be having some trouble with.)
That's actually a fairly reasonable question, which I know you asked a couple times already, which I haven't addressed.
So, I'll give a genuine answer: The report explicitly doesn't deal with the question of who raped the Israeli women who were raped during the October 7th attack, because they were already dealing with enough evidentiary difficulties just trying to put together and say conclusively whether or not it had happened, and where, and dealing with a certain amount of dishonesty and fog-of-war among other issues that made it hard to even sort out the basics, especially with victims who are now deceased where they were dealing purely with forensic evidence. Trying to bring a standard of proof of which specific men had done it into the equation would have made their already pretty challenging task more difficult and more open to criticism, I think.
To me, that's not automatically a bad thing. It means they're being cautious and trying to have solid backing for things they are saying. I would contrast it for example with the abysmally low standard of proof that led your OP article to write things like "some reports have asserted that those acts and other reported atrocities were committed by civilians and those not affiliated with the group." Of course, it's easy to simply say that obviously it was probably unrelated civilians who raped all these women during the October 7th attack, and not Hamas, if you don't feel bound by the need to produce evidence or even answer simple questions like, "What reports? Who are you saying did the rapes, then? What the fuck are you talking about?"
You are, of course, welcome to seize onto that pretty sensible decision by the report authors and shake it back and forth like a little bad-faith terrier, as if it somehow invalidated the whole report -- for example, implying that the evidence it presents of hostages who were raped during captivity somehow leaves open the possibility that they were raped by some other, non-Hamas captors during their time as prisoners of Hamas.
Speaking of which, how's that search for the report's treatment of the prisoners who were raped in captivity coming? I can give you a couple other hints about where to find it, if you still can't find it after I sent you a link to the report, and then gave you hints about where to look in the table of contents, which page of the TOC, and the general area on the page where you might be able to find the applicable entry.
I think some people's brains are all-or-nothing. I mean, it's certainly true that whatever significant crimes against humanity Hamas is doing, Israel is doing literally 10 times worse. But some people will go from there to saying that everything Palestinian is good, even if it's a violent and corrupt organization like Hamas which is bringing only death and destruction to innocents on both sides, and accomplishing nothing at all for better conditions for the Palestinian people.
Surely the right answer is for the Palestinian people who only want to live and not get murdered or starved to death, and the Israeli people who only want to go to the music festival and not get raped or shot or kidnapped, to gang up and seize all the people on both sides who want to continue and profit off the conflict, and string them up upside-down like Mussolini, so they can die of thirst over several days in the hot desert sun. Then, the problem simplified, they can get together and work out some approximation of a peace agreement.
Surely there are a few problems with that, not least of which that the people who like continuing the war have most of the weapons and wouldn't agree to the proposal. But that makes more sense to me than picking a "right side" and defending them regardless of what horrifying thing they're doing to innocent people on the "wrong side."
I think they are basing it off the conclusion that they have already decided that they want to reach
You said that a soldier raping a civilian is a regular criminal offense. I cited the UN resolution that says among other things:
The Council demanded that all parties to armed conflict take immediate and appropriate measures to protect civilians, including by, among others, enforcing appropriate military disciplinary measures and upholding the principle of command responsibility; training troops on the categorical prohibition of all forms of sexual violence against civilians; debunking myths that fuel sexual violence; and vetting armed and security forces to take into account past sexual violence.
I mean, it's possible that we're saying the same thing; sort of contingent on what you mean exactly by "isolated incidents". I am saying that widespread rape on October 7th is indicative of a war crime regardless of whether approval for it came through Hamas's chain of command. Is that what you're saying?
What page of the report did you read that dealt with hostages?
Not that I don't believe you; I just have forgotten, and I want you to remind me so I can reference it really quick so we can continue the conversation.
My evidence for Hamas raping people is the UN report I already posted which talks about all the evidence for Hamas raping people. We're talking about something different, which is Hamas fighters using a word which is explicitly associated with rape (and a pretty in depth explanation of what it does and doesn't imply.)
Isn't "Never Play Defense" fun? I can switch to a new accusation, if you decide to change your mind and continue the conversation.
Yeah. That’s what I was saying - it is clearly superior to C++ and probably to Java but those are like the worst two languages in the meta. It’s like hey this is a clear improvement over what we were doing 40 years ago that’s acknowledged by everyone has aged poorly.
Idk man, I’m not trying to be bigoted about it just saying my experience is more pleasant with a few other languages available outside of that grouping.