The only thing making his life difficult is his constant need for attention
ursakhiin
I'd bet it's less simple input sanitizing and more 2 mistakes made separately because they don't know any better.
- The input field converting everything to a string indiscriminately
- Because they did 1, converting everything back to the assumed type
If the front end Dev makes the first mistake, null would be sent in the body as "null". Then on the backend, somebody might even be binding the variables correctly, but before hand realizing they have to deal with the market and rather than just have a conversation undoes it in their own code.
Also, Pepsi Max is a zero calorie drink, so 1 a day is hardly a lot. Three artificial sweeteners aren't the best for you, but OP shouldn't feel like they are ruining their health on that.
To this point, for me, it was all about the bubbles. So replacing with a seltzer water did wonders. Sometimes I still have a craving to pound bubbles real quick.
To answer disassociating you. You had help. That's how.
Real talk, what is the real barrier to somebody creating a competing publishing firm for these things.
I'm not a scientist, but I always hear about how expensive it is to either publish or get access to scientific papers without contacting the author directly. Why does that reputation exist? Why does it seem like the scientific community is so dependent on stuff like this?
There should 1(5), and preferably only 1(5), really obvious way(s) to do it.
It's interesting because I didn't have any game breaking bugs and I had a 5950x, 32GB, and a 3080.
That launch was a serious YMMV situation.
The bugs were not experienced by everybody. On my PC I ran into no critical bugs and very few minor bugs on launch week. I was definitely lucky, though.
It's possible many review sites were running rigs similar to mine. I personally had a blast with it even at launch and played it 3 times in the first 3 months. Though, it's definitely much better now, it wasn't a bad game on its own before, if not for the stability issues must people had.
I'm not going to tell you you shouldn't do that, I think everybody else has done enough telling others what to do. I'll try to focus more on what you'd need to accomplish and why what you're asking hasn't been done.
Building an OS involves a lot of complex work using very low level calls. The easiest way to think about it, IMO, is that whatever language you use needs to be able to communicate directly with the hardware without any abstraction between the code and the hardware after it's compiled.
Basic Python, out of the box, requires multiple levels of abstraction to run.
(I'm simplifying here) You write code which is run through an interpreter. The interpreter is a compiled application that translates Python into code the operating system can understand. Then the operating system translates that to calls the hardware can understand.
In that process, the python code is translated to byte code, assembly, and machine code. The Python virtual machine handles memory management for you. It also handles some processing concepts for you.
You'd need to start by finding (or inventing) a solution that compiles Python to assembly without the need of an interpreter or OS in between you and the hardware. It's worth noting here that Python itself isn't even fully written in Python and is instead written largely in C because Python isn't a compiled language. You'd then need to extend Python with the ability to completely manage memory and processor threads without the VM. You'd need to do that because that's really the main purpose of an operating system.
Something we learn in programming is choosing the right tool for the job. Python isn't a great option for this type of project because the requirements just to get to where you can start are so high that it's not really considered worth while. Is it possible, yes, in theory. But without the python interpreter and VM, you'd have to ask if you're really developing Python or something else that just uses pythons syntax.
I think the headline is poorly worded. Apple paid $20 a person to not have to respect their privacy. They did that because our lack of privacy is worth much more than $20 to them.
This isn't 32000 in 1 wave, though. This is ~2500 a year over 13 years. Even the answers given at the beginning of the study could have changed wildly if the same people had been polled at the end. And even if not, 4 people per city is not representative of an entire city at any given moment of time.
What demographics in China did they poll each year? Did they poll people of different racial profiles? Did they poll uyhgurs? Were the candidates selected randomly or were the assigned by the government? If the latter, were they coached or paid? Any number of things could throw off that study.
Hey now, they aren't Nazis. Nazis at least believe in something, even if it's something terrible.