It is good to have many web microframeworks in a language ecosystem. In Python probably there are a hundred of those. Many of those are not picked up by the community –a natural selection. Only really a few of those survived. It all depends on you if you are going to choose Revel, Martini, Goji or whatever you want. Today, thousands of apps run on web.py, yet most of the source code is untouched last 3-5 years (https://github.com/webpy/webpy/tree/master/web) It's impressive it just works!
Personally, I am looking for frameworks that many people rely on, maintained frequently as needed and works just fine. There could be a +-10% difference on QPS those framework URL routers can handle and render a 'hello world' page.
So this is a nice attempt I would say, looks cleaner than Martini, still supports middlewares. On the other hand, Martini has support to serve static files, logging, panic recovery, which are also good and has a bigger fanboy community around it: https://github.com/go-martini/martini
Randall Munroe's handwriting is a bit difficult to OCR because a lot of the letters are smushed together close enough that the it's not possible to unambiguously segment the text into distinct letters (which is a necessary first step in any OCR engine that I'm aware of). Maybe Google's (or Vicarious's) magical convolutional neural net that can solve CAPTCHAs would fare better.
> it's not possible to unambiguously segment the text into distinct letters (which is a necessary first step in any OCR engine that I'm aware of)
This made me realize I never saw such a thing as OWR, i.e. a software that would first try to recognized whole words, then go down to character level if no satisfying match found.
> it's not possible to unambiguously segment the text into distinct letters (which is a necessary first step in any OCR engine that I'm aware of)
In my experience, the ability to handle overlapping letters (which is very common on type-written text and professionally typeset material) is one of the key things that separate the relatively lightweight OCRs (like Ocrad and GOCR) from the big complicated ones (Tesseract, Cuneiform, Abbyy etc). Whitespace character segmentation cannot be taken for granted if you want to do any useful OCR of "historical" material.
> (underlined) Today it's a prostitution ring, tomorrow it could be an illegal gambling ring, and maybe next week it could be a drug operation.
This is textbook 'slippery slope' fallacy. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope You said that if we allow A to happen, then Z will eventually happen too, therefore A should not happen.
A slippery slope is fallacious if there's no argument for the the progression down the slope. Lots of valid arguments take the form of a slippery slope.
In this case, there is in fact an escalating progression of bad things happening in Airbnb rentals; in rough order:
* Criminal enterprises buying entire buildings and turning them into unlawful hotels
* Renters trashing Airbnb rentals
* Floating brothels
The leap from here to "gambling" doesn't sound too crazy; in fact, gambling seems more innocuous than a floating brothel.
The point is that any inconvenience to neighbours from such a 'brothel' is hypothetical - nobody even noticed that it was there, so they definitely weren't harmed in any way.
There isn't anywhere near enough information to ascertain whether neighbors noticed.
I have no idea who my neighbors are. If they weren't actually here, in the building, I'd have no way to contact them whatsoever. That doesn't mean I don't notice Airbnb tenants.
Illegal gambling is hardly a problem anymore since there are so many legal places to gamble. I think she just picked a random item from her mental bucket of "things that sound scary and bad".
Slippery slope is not a logical fallacy. Like any argument, it might be right or it might be wrong, and if your entire argument is, "X and Y are in some way vaguely similar, so if we allow X, then Y," then your point is certainly under-argued. But it is, in fact, the case that in at least some circumstances, people change the status quo by taking a small step outside the status quo, normalizing it as the new status quo, and then taking another small step.
If you believe that AirBnB WILL be used for prostitution, but WILL NOT be used for gambling or a drug operation, you should articulate a reason why you think there is a difference in kind that would prevent people from using AirBnB for those other purposes.
Would this be an example for Tragedy Of The Commons?
A small group of users act rational and in self-interest (by offering prostitution, illegal gambling etc.) and therefore make it worse for the other 'legitimate' users. In the long run, the 'illegal' users destroy AirBnB (by causing stricter laws etc.) and therefore destroy their own business.
It is absolutely an informal fallacy[1]. The onus is on the person making the claim of similarity to demonstrate why that similarity is valid, so on its own it lacks any argumentative weight.
Something being an informal fallacy doesn't mean that it can't be a component of a good argument (ie. correlation not implying causation doesn't mean there are no cases where something can be demonstrated to be causitive), it means that it is not an argument in and of itself.
That kind of progression really happened. "Perhaps allowing interracial marriage today will lead to men marrying other men tomorrow". Gay marriage was unthinkable a hundred years ago. The ideas that are acceptable to society change over time and we can't be so arrogant as to assume our current set of values is correct while all the previous ones were wrong and no future ones will make ours look wrong. You can already see attitudes towards drug use changing to the point where Krueger's "drug operations" seem harmless to many people today.
Agreed. But the laws of today have to apply to society as we know of today. I'm all for forward progress but we can't make laws for how our evolved selves.
In 10 years same opposing sex marriage might the same as opposing interracial marriage is today. But we're not there and the laws have to reflect what society as a whole is ready for.
It is a logical fallacy, however, claiming that an argument is invalid due to logical fallacy, is also a fallacy.
There is enough evidence that shows that prostitution, drugs, and violent crime are inextricably linked.
Prostitutes are more likely to be victims of sexual assault, while being under the influence of drugs provided by their pimps, who may also use violence as a means to control the prostitutes, and as way to deal with Johns.
In addition to sex, drugs, and violence, prostitution has ties to human trafficking, child exploitation, and slavery, not to mention the health risks.
If my neighbour chooses to work as a prostitute in their apartment, or rent their apartment to someone who happens to be a prostitute - that's not nearly the end of the world, you know, they're people too, just with a comparably hard/unpleasant profession.
An active neighbour can easily be bringing some stranger they picked up at a bar twice each night; if that stranger pays afterwards then that doesn't change anything for me.
In this case it's a prostitution ring, which isn't really the same as a long term neighbor who happens to sleep around a lot. I think someone who calls an apartment home rather then stopping there once and never coming back will be more respectful.
You seem to be saying stable prostitutes or brothels are OK even though they are also illegal in those buildings. I agree with the parent that a promiscuous person is effectively a prostitute with the distinction being only an arbitrary legal one. As you say though, the temporary nature of their stay is probably the real problem.
this only bears a very superficial resemblance to the slippery slope argument. We're not leaping from a dubious, frowned upon activity to an extreme hypothetical.
All of the aforementioned activities are (a) unambiguously illegal, and (b) within the same class of illegality, in that they are all based off social norms of morality and thrive on the same drives of moral ambiguity.
That's a problem with the comments, not the story itself. If it's upvoted and legitimate content (in this case it is closely about startup world) , shouldn't it be staying where it is? Something with hundreds of upvotes probably should not go to the second page just because a few flagged the story.
Thats the point. There was no widely recognized host before that could try to challenge big "cloud" companies. Now since DO is around trying to steal the market with pricing (and acceptable quality), Linode needs to step up their game. All of sudden it turned out that they can give twice the resources, hourly pricing and still make money. Hail to free market competition!
Why? Go doesn't really offer a whole lot in terms of security, except for better managed memory. I'm not even sure you could reliably eliminate side channel attacks in Go.
You could terminate connections with it and have a local socket to another process. As we have seen putting ssl in another process is helpful for memory isolation...
Personally, I am looking for frameworks that many people rely on, maintained frequently as needed and works just fine. There could be a +-10% difference on QPS those framework URL routers can handle and render a 'hello world' page.
So this is a nice attempt I would say, looks cleaner than Martini, still supports middlewares. On the other hand, Martini has support to serve static files, logging, panic recovery, which are also good and has a bigger fanboy community around it: https://github.com/go-martini/martini