> Python is quickly turning into a crowded keyword junkyard

* Javascript (ECMAScript) has 63 keywords. * Rust has 50 keywords. * Java has 51 keywords + 17 contextually reserved words, for a total of 68. * Python has now 36 keywords + 4 'soft' keywords, for a total of 40. * Go has 25 keywords.

> The workers were breaking the laws, ...

How sure are we of that? Did we really get this information from trustworthy sources?

Not all of them were, and at least one of the arrested workers was here fully legally.

I accept your suffering if you choose so. If I knew you personally, I would even do all I could to help and comfort you. However, I cannot condone you imposing suffering on others in the name of YOUR religion.

I never said anything about me wanting to impose my religious belief on others.

It is not that someone else shares YOUR birthday: it is that two people (among those 23) will have the same birthday.

oooooh, got it. That wasn't clear.

He did mention he lives in France ...

If I remember correctly, unlike the standard Python interpreter, ptpython does not support the replacement of sys.excepthook by a custom one. I know that I look at seeing if I could have it support friendly-traceback but couldn't.

If they are not located in the US, why would they?

In my experience (in a different field), it is common for researchers to acknowledge the source of their funding. In particular, researchers are keen to acknowledge funding from government grants, as this is perceived to be helpful in applying for future research grants.

I glanced through the paper and I could not find any mention indicating who funded that study.

I'm also very sceptical of single studies that support the status quo for very large industries -- even more so when there is no indication of who funded the study.

From my experience conflict of interests and funding sources is a disclosure enforced by the journal

Being a preprint, this is obviously neither peer reviewed nor vetted by a journal.

In this case, I cannot deduce what journal they plan on submitting to (if they plan to at all)

Yeah, I don’t know what the solution is, but I’ve certainly noticed a trend in clickbate websites reporting on preprint studies that often don’t pass peer review after the fact.

This is a major issue in scientific reporting and research in general. It’s particularly damaging because of anchoring bias.

This is simply not true.

Just to clarify : What's not true is that Canada jails people for criticizing islam, not that it was claimed :

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36061407#36064645

Tooling is a single screwdriver. There is no "unused bits" clutter, and no need to pay someone to replace a part.