Not really tech related, but the most memorable for me is "Tense Present"[1] by David Foster Wallace in the April 2001 issue of Harper's Magazine. It's a beautiful exploration of language and dialect. It taught me at a young age to appreciate the way others speak and the socioeconomic implications of the way we listen to others. I'm still a SNOOT at heart, but I learned to temper it thanks to this piece and years of study in linguistics.

[1]: https://harpers.org/wp-content/uploads/HarpersMagazine-2001-...

> when you struggle on a freaking leetcode problem

I'm all for the message of "get help if you need it," and it sounds like OP needs the help of a professional, so I upvoted your comment. But minimizing the triggering event is not helpful; the things you see as trivial or unimportant might be insurmountable or critical to someone else.

I could have worded that better. my point is not to minimize the stressful situation, it is that the stress isn’t going to end when leetcode is done.

Some friendly feedback: I clicked through to your article about the two pointer technique and, AFAICT, there's nothing for me to do or read here. It says "In this guide, we'll cover..." but it's not clear how to actually view the guide. I'm guessing - without having clicked around at all - that my next step would be to create an account and visit the page again, but that's not at all clear to me as an unauthenticated user.

I do see a small "Login" on the bottom right of the page, as well as "Sign in" and a highlighted "Upgrade" at the top. But there is no CTA telling me what my next step should be. Maybe users of your site who land on this page will know what that step should be, but you might want to add some direction for people who randomly land on it via SEO/SEM or links on forums.

Cheers!

ETA: in a search for some action, I clicked all over the graphic and on a couple phrases in the intro to see if they would take me somewhere. If you're tracking clicks, it might be worth looking at whether other users are doing similar things.

Thanks so much for the heads up :-) It's amazing how much of the user's perspective you miss when you're heads-down in code all day.

I've added some navigational indicators to hopefully make it a little clearer that you can press the footer buttons or swipe on the screen. Appreciate the friendly feedback!

I had the same experience; at the very bottom of the screen are "next" and "back" buttons. But it took me a while.

Very nice! Is there a way to provide feedback on a given item? For example, this[1] seems to have a typo in the title (and thus the URL).

I'm sure you've already thought of this, but it's pretty easy to see how to monetize this by affiliate-linking out to a print/frame provider.

[1]: https://artvee.com/dl/valles-mariners/

There is also https://expediadotcom.github.io/haystack/, an Open Tracing-compliant distributed tracing system.

Actually, even God couldn't beat dollar-cost averaging[1].

[1]: https://ofdollarsanddata.com/even-god-couldnt-beat-dollar-co...

I'm friends with several philosophers since I took it fairly seriously in undergrad and befriended several grad students. From my perspective, the "trolling" is generally just pointing out interesting entailments of another philosopher's arguments. For example, in a recent thread philosopher X outlined philosopher Y's argument just to point out that he hopes it shows the "weird consequences" of the basis of Y's argument. Y showed up to point out that X had missed a key wrinkle. A bunch of others showed up to wrangle about the meaning of certain words.

... So basically the same thing philosophers do in their papers, just with fewer citations.

(That's not me throwing shade -- just pointing out how the field seems to work. I loved and still love philosophy.)

Really good point. By the same token, someone should let Dan Patrick know that it's already illegal to surveil and harass people in bathrooms.

First, this is a good thing for the community. The ecosystem has been pretty well prepared for 3.x adoption for a while, but we just haven't done it. Still, when Django switched its default docs to use 3.x instead of 2.x, it noticeably increased adoption of 3.x. (Source: Kenneth Reitz on "Talk Python to Me" episode #6.) By pushing on with 3.x, Django is doing its part to drag the rest of us forward with it.

Second, this is necessary. Support for Python 2.x is supposed to end in 2020, per Guido's keynote at PyCon 2016, so Django is going to have to get in line in ~3 years one way or the other. A major version increment is a great time to introduce such a breaking change.

So ... "what this means" is that Django is doing what it has to do, which happens to coincide with the interests of the community at large. shrug I'm glad it's happening, but there shouldn't be a whole lot of drama or hand-wringing here.

Seriously? Was this a professional program or something? Maybe I was a particularly poor undergrad, but I can't imagine being able to afford a separate computer, even a shitty one, with a month's morning. Nor could I justify the expense -- "oh that's just my test-taking computer."

It didn't have to run any real software except a browser and maybe a PDF reader. Also, yeah it was a remote grad program, so it was a bit of an experiment with how you do testing remotely at scale. I think they were trying to reach a fair compromise that didn't involve rewriting course content to include more open exams.

If you could use a virtualbox I would be totally ok with this, the fact that they exclude exactly that makes it 10 fold shittier.

If you consider the purpose is to monitor the entire computer to see if you have notes pulled up, you can see why they have this requirement.

I thought the entire premise of proctorU and proctorTrack (which gatech is now using instead of proctorU) was ridiculous though. A cheap hdmi splitter and a long cable would be all you needed to pipe the test out to a second monitor in another room where someone could scoop up the whole test for later. Or maybe even feed back answers to some tiny headphones hidden behind the ear. Impossible to detect.