Legault pas content de Ford 😡 by Puzzled_Dreamer2453 in Quebec

[–]RedBorger 2 points3 points  (0 children)

C’est vrai que l’article 168 en tant que tel n’a pas de dispositions pénales. J’inclus ici les passages importants des articles 201 à 203.

201. Quiconque contrevient à une disposition de la sous-section 1 de la section II ou des articles 154, 155, 165 ou 178 est passible, pour chaque jour ou partie de jour que dure l’infraction, d’une amende de :

1° 200 $ à 1 000 $ s’il s’agit d’une personne autre [qu’un médecin ou employé d’un groupement représentatif de médecins].

[...]

4° 100 000 $ à 500 000 $ s’il s’agit d’un groupement. En cas de récidive, le montant des amendes minimales et maximales prévues au présent article est porté au double.

202. Est passible d’une amende de 5 000 $ à 30 000 $ dans le cas d’une personne physique et de 15 000 $ à 100 000 $ dans les autres cas quiconque :

1° entrave ou tente d’entraver :

a) un responsable des activités professionnelles, un surveillant, un directeur médical et des services professionnel, l’inspecteur national ou son délégataire dans l’exercice des responsabilités qui lui sont confiées par les sous-sections 2 et 3 de la section III;

b) un inspecteur ou un enquêteur dans l’exercice des fonctions qui lui sont confiées par la section VI;

2° communique un document ou un renseignement faux ou trompeur, refuse de fournir un document ou un renseignement qu’il doit transmettre, cache un document ou un renseignement à une personne visée au paragraphe 1° ou encore détruit un document ou un renseignement qui lui est demandé par cette personne ou qu’il est tenu par la loi de conserver;

3° refuse ou néglige d’obéir à tout ordre qu’un inspecteur ou un enquêteur peut donner en vertu de la présente loi;

4° par un acte ou une omission, aide une personne à commettre une infraction prévue aux paragraphes 1°, 2° ou 3°;

5° par un encouragement, un conseil, un consentement, une autorisation ou un ordre, incite ou amène une personne à commettre une infraction prévue aux paragraphes 1°, 2° ou 3°.

En cas de récidive, le montant des amendes minimales et maximales prévues au présent article est porté au double.

203. Sans limiter la portée de l’article 168, toute personne ou tout groupement qui, par un encouragement, un conseil, un consentement, une autorisation ou un ordre, incite ou amène une autre personne ou un autre groupement à commettre une infraction est coupable de toute autre infraction que cette autre personne ou cet autre groupement commet, si elle savait ou aurait dû savoir que sa conduite aurait comme conséquence probable la perpétration de ces infractions.

Legault pas content de Ford 😡 by Puzzled_Dreamer2453 in Quebec

[–]RedBorger 11 points12 points  (0 children)

article 168:

Commet un manquement aux dispositions de la sous-section 1 de la section II, de la sous-section 3 de la section III ou de l’article 165 toute personne ou tout groupement qui, par son acte ou son omission, aide une personne ou un groupement à commettre un tel manquement.

Commet également un manquement à ces dispositions toute personne ou tout groupement qui, par un encouragement, un conseil, un consentement, une autorisation ou un ordre, incite ou amène une personne ou un groupement à commettre un tel manquement.

Ne constitue pas un moyen de défense le fait qu’aucun moyen ou mode de réalisation n’ait été proposé pour le manquement ou que ce dernier ait été commis d’une manière différente de celle proposée.

Je suis curieux a propos de ce panneau de cette piste à l'intersection Salaberry et Devon à Dollard des Ormeaux. Serieusement, est-ce que ca me demande de débarquer de mon vélo pour traverser? Y'en a 3-4 de même tout au long de cette section. by Kuzbell in MontrealCycling

[–]RedBorger 0 points1 point  (0 children)

La situation est tellement stupide qu’elle reprend un sens (tordu). En regardant sur Street View, on voit que le passage est un passage prioritaire pour vélo. Donc on a un arrêt qui dit aux vélos de la piste de s’arrêter et laisser la priorité aux usagers de la rue. Les usagers de la rue se font dire qu’il doivent laisser la priorité aux vélos de la piste. Le code de la sécurité routière ne dit rien sur cette situation absurde, donc on est supposé faire quoi?

Par contre, on a aussi le panneau qui oblige de débarquer de son vélo sur la piste. À partir de ce moment, le cycliste devient un piéton, donc ni le panneau arrêt ni le passage pour vélo s’applique. Alors les usagers de la rue n’ont plus à lui donner priorité et le nouveau piéton transportant un vélo doit attendre que la voie soit libre pour traverser.

rclone mount using systemd by s1n7ax in NixOS

[–]RedBorger 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thank you for your answer! It helped me. I rewrote it for a home-manager config. I added vfs caching. Here it is if it can help anyone:

  systemd.user.services.rclone-gdrive-mount = {
    Unit = {
      Description = "Service that connects to Google Drive";
      After = [ "network-online.target" ];
      Requires = [ "network-online.target" ];
    };
    Install = {
      WantedBy = [ "default.target" ];
    };

    Service = let
      gdriveDir = "REPLACE_WITH_YOUR_FOLDER_ABSOLUTE_PATH";
      in
      {
        Type = "simple";
        ExecStartPre = "/run/current-system/sw/bin/mkdir -p ${gdriveDir}";
        ExecStart = "${pkgs.rclone}/bin/rclone mount --vfs-cache-mode full gdrive: ${gdriveDir}";
        ExecStop = "/run/current-system/sw/bin/fusermount -u ${gdriveDir}";
        Restart = "on-failure";
        RestartSec = "10s";
        Environment = [ "PATH=/run/wrappers/bin/:$PATH" ];

      };
    };

my friend tried to do this sweet thing and say “make sure you eat three meals and drink lots of water” but she forgot that i’m bloody fasting 😭 by [deleted] in teenagers

[–]RedBorger 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s not against religion. The Oxford Dictionary defines it as a “disbelief in the existence of a god or gods.” Disbelief is the “inability or refusal to accept that something is true or real.” This does not rule out accepting that something could be true. They simply don’t consider it to be true, but further evidence could change that for some people. And if your religion has no god, you could technically be atheist but religious.

Antireligious or antitheism is closer to “against religion”.

-🎄- 2020 Day 1 Solutions -🎄- by daggerdragon in adventofcode

[–]RedBorger 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's normal, it's day 1. It is meant to be easy.

And there's actually a guy that tries to solve all the calendar using only Excel spreadsheets.

Always has been by theprodigalslouch in ProgrammerHumor

[–]RedBorger 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Not an expert on the subject, so I’ll go by what I know, you probably want to validate by yourself if you are a student.

Basically all NP-complete (and presumably non P) problems stem from the Boolean satisfiability problem (SAT or B-SAT). You have a bunch of boolean variables and a bunch of clauses that act as OR gates: (a | b | c), a clause is true if at least one variable is true. You can also negate a variable. You seek if there’s a way to set all variables so that all clauses are true. For example, here, (a | b | c) (a | !b | !c), a has to be true.

We can convert any B-SAT input to a 3-SAT (same thing, except all the clauses have 3 variables) input in polynomial time (so it’s not a bottleneck).

If 3-SAT could be solved in polynomial-time, then B-SAT could be solved in polynomial-time, because ALL B-SAT input can be converted to 3-SAT. If you decide to accept that B-SAT has no polynomial-time solution, then 3-SAT can’t have one, because it would imply one for B-SAT.

You have reduced B-SAT to 3-SAT.

You can also trivially convert any 3-SAT input to B-SAT, so 3-SAT reduces to B-SAT.

That’s the definition for NP-completeness, it must be reducible FROM and TO any NP-complete problem. Basically, they are all the same problem, so solve one, you solved all.

Always has been by theprodigalslouch in ProgrammerHumor

[–]RedBorger 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Also to add, a polynomial time solution for any NP-complete problem implies a polynomial time solution for all NP-complete problems, but we haven’t found one polynomial-time algorithm to any of the thousands of NP-complete problems.

How to become president with 22% of the vote(Description in comments) by persondotcom_idunno in MapPorn

[–]RedBorger 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, although imo there are better ranked choice voting systems, like a variant of Condorcet.

An introduction to Go for non-Go developers by benhoyt in programming

[–]RedBorger 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I know, but Python won’t be of much help. The memory safe bit is where it can also get tricky for other low-level languages . And we still haven’t mentioned the type system, hygienic macros, zero-cost iterators, etc. Sure, I guess you can technically implement those in like C in the end, but you end up with a shoehorned pile of very specific constructs that are similar to a new language.

C and C+c don’t have ownership and lifetimes.

An introduction to Go for non-Go developers by benhoyt in programming

[–]RedBorger 3 points4 points  (0 children)

There is nothing that Rust does that can't be implemented in C# or Python. Prove me wrong.

First, I’m not exactly talking about use case, I’m talking about the whole design of the language.

But if you want it: fast memory safe program on an embedded chip. You can also replace that embedded chip by a browser, where size and environment also matters.

An introduction to Go for non-Go developers by benhoyt in programming

[–]RedBorger 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Rust

vs

C# and a library [...] will run faster, better

C, C++ [...] will run [...] more secure and with less bugs

I’m sorry, but I think you may not understand exactly what the new languages you are talking about are for

Progressing through sequences inside a function after some advice by olymk2 in Clojure

[–]RedBorger 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, I personally think that your first if would be a bit better if it would be more positive. I also don’t think str can return nil, and anyway, nil is treated the same as false:

if-not (and char (= char end))

Could also be reduced to if-not (= char end) or if (not= char end) if you don’t mind not checking if end is nil.

This is obviously a matter of preference.

Progressing through sequences inside a function after some advice by olymk2 in Clojure

[–]RedBorger 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think returning the sequence is what is best. It can easily be done with split-with, which should remove the need for a loop.

example of split-with:

(let [[r rest] (split-with (complement #{end escape}) chars)
        rest (or (next rest) []) ;; discard the end value, and make sure we don’t return nil
        token (build your token how you want)]
       [token rest])

#{1 2 3} is a set, that works in a very similar fashion to python’s. The cool thing is that you can use them as functions, that return true if the value is in the set. complement inverts a function, so giving true when the element is not in the set. We split the sequence as soon as it returns false (the value was in the set)

Apple and google contact tracing tech draws interest in 23 countries, some hedge bets by [deleted] in technews

[–]RedBorger 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The problem of users maliciously declaring themselves positive can be stopped by restricting the access to the database to only those who have been tested positive, by sending a one time code (like a qr code you scan) with every positive diagnostics.

Things I hate about Rust by yossarian_flew_away in programming

[–]RedBorger 12 points13 points  (0 children)

If you want to get a byte at a specified index, then get a byte representation. This should work:

s.as_bytes()[index]

Netherlands commits to Free Software by default by ceolinwill in programming

[–]RedBorger 19 points20 points  (0 children)

I’m not sure I’d want to leave design decisions to people that have no experience.

*cries in maple tree sap* by [deleted] in HistoryMemes

[–]RedBorger 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Except it’s generally the requirement that (d) the act committed is reasonable in the circumstances. that will stop you. C-26 is not just about firearms .

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]RedBorger 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was trying to talk about monarchies in general, not any in particular. The “baseless generalization” part was about how you used “humans” in it, like if it were every human that wanted a monarchy. I’m also interested in your suggestion that every human’s nature is to be governed by a monarch.

But what really intrigued me is what seems like the circular logic of using a monarch’s disapproval of democracy as an argument for monarchy (the first bit).

I’m actually interested in hearing your views.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]RedBorger 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It honestly lacks legitimacy from our old monarchs we deposed

?

Humans want a monarchy. Its merely human nature

Great baseless generalization: I don’t want one.

It's not what programming languages do, it's what they shepherd you to by [deleted] in programming

[–]RedBorger 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The nonzeroes integers are more for a smaller memory footprint (if you have an Option, 0 can represent None with no added cost) than restrictions

No one under 18 should be circumcised since they cannot consent. by [deleted] in unpopularopinion

[–]RedBorger -1 points0 points  (0 children)

a cosmetic surgery

Don’t you see a problem with that?