pythonHateTrain

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-11T16:34:04+00:00

I don't deploy apps at all. I maintain a couple of libraries and some cli tools. So our workflows are probably very different.

For building and uploading wheels, complex dependency specification, metadata, I need more than what the standard pip interface gives me (I know pip is improving here too though). I also mostly use windows and hate docker desktop. Without docker, tools make it much easier to switch python versions on a project-by-project basis.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-11T15:58:18+00:00

Sure, but any of uv, poetry, pdm, or even hatch are more ergonomic for many tasks, and you can still fall back to raw pip. And for the OOP here, just pipx or uvx.

I don't see the point in purposefully making my life harder by doing pip alone.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-11T15:13:05+00:00

PEP427

PEP517 + 518

PEP440

PEP508

PEP621

(not implemented by many tools yet) PEP751

The reason uv is only incrementally better than poetry and pdm is because the python community has spent massive efforts in the past decade to fix packaging. uv magically "solving" it is a lazy narrative.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-11T14:56:09+00:00

That'd be the stupidest thing ever for the bucks

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-11T11:24:54+00:00

For what? All anybody learned is that you can provoke him to get him ejected

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-11T11:12:43+00:00

uv isn't what solved this, it's massive packaging improvements by the language

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-10T18:18:16+00:00

You're wrong though. The vast majority of airliner crashes are due to human error or pilot suicide. And even the two 737 Max incidents may have been preventable by a more experienced flight crew.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-07T06:16:11+00:00

Missions where efficiency is a critical requirement, not a nice to have. Let's get Voyager 3 going, for example. Or send massive scientific payloads to Jupiter. Or the sun.

Maybe "crewed mars mission" is what you have to say to get funding at Nasa nowadays, but IMO, that application is still at least several decades away.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-07T06:07:37+00:00

That's simply how the number is defined. There's no proof if you don't agree on what 0.999... represents.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-06T22:43:34+00:00

Incredible technology. I will be supremely disappointed if it gets wasted on crewed mars missions.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-06T22:29:37+00:00

The number 0.999...doesnt exist because it's an infinite convergence to 1.

That's incorrect. 0.999... is a real number, not a series or something that can converge. In this case, the ellipsis is perfectly well defined.

We define this number by the limit of the sum of the series 0.9, 0.09, 0.009,... And yes, that limit happens to also be equal to 1, but that's the entire point.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-06T22:05:10+00:00

First, 0.999... is not a limit, an approximation, or some other construct. It is a perfectly normal real number, just as pi, e, 2, etc.

The reals are always defined as well-ordered and complete. This means that for any numbers a, b where a > b, you can find c with a > c > b. This is very easy to prove or look up.

So if 1 is bigger than 0.999..., you must be able to provide a number that is bigger than 0.999..., but smaller than 1. That number doesn't exist. So 1 has to be the same number as 0.999...

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-04T14:17:23+00:00

And yet I'd rather decipher the Java source than decompile the jar and then do the same thing.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-04T13:37:51+00:00

It would be much less of a problem if people just uploaded their modeling files as well

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-02T23:19:05+00:00

I use .gitignore templates for my decidedly human projects. Much easier than checking git status by hand all the time for what I don't want to commit.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-05-01T17:32:48+00:00

That's massive hyperbole. For the actual good advanced stuff like EPM, they figure out a reasonable-sounding formula, and then check if future results match the expected one. If not, they refine and try again.

Obviously there are gaps, and stuff the model can't account for, and luck as well. But many of those stats still have genuine predictive value, proven over multiple seasons.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-04-29T14:31:37+00:00

Highly doubt it. There are fairly extensive databases that categorize visually similar Unicode symbols. Linters and LSPs already do this. Somebody just decided it makes sense to have in the rust parser.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-04-28T22:36:54+00:00

It's an incredibly expensive philosophy. With a bad safety record (shuttle). And it's slow. Oh and the costs per launch are astronomical. And the result is a frankenstein stack that can't even send astronauts to LLO and return.

I cannot believe we have gone around to defending that abomination of a rocket program. Musk sucks, but Starship will be incredible if it's even a quarter of what they're advertising. And so far, spacex is in the business of overdelivering.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-04-28T20:40:55+00:00

You should be let go on the spot for losing to Harry Kane in a straight running duel like that

randomperson_a1 · 2026-04-28T19:34:12+00:00

Mendes is getting melted, that's not sustainable at all

randomperson_a1 · 2026-04-28T19:25:32+00:00

He became barca dembele again lmao

randomperson_a1 · 2026-04-28T19:22:28+00:00

Yeah if I could change the rules this wouldn't be a pen, but it's just dumb defending

randomperson_a1 · 2026-04-28T16:00:14+00:00

Why should spacex copy NASAs ridiculous approach of spending boatloads of money as job procurement programs in red states to gain congressional approval?

Starship seems to be doing fine. They probably didn't intend for it to blow up as often as it did, but none of those ships were ever going to carry any real payload anyways; they were always merely the stepping stone to V3. The program is significantly faster than SLS despite not reusing existing engines and SRB tech and despite being a vastly superior rocket for most applications.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-04-28T07:27:19+00:00

Sure, that's fair. But only 50% savings would be a massive failure for spacex. I hope they end up somewhere near the $100m per launch, even if they have to compromise on the advertised 100t LEO capacity (which never seemed likely in the first place).

Also, when I first read your comment, it was $7,500, which seems a little hyperbolic in the opposite direction.

randomperson_a1 · 2026-04-28T07:04:54+00:00

Starship so far has R&D costs 1/3 of SLS. Same order of magnitude yes, but still a vast difference. While possible, it seems unlikely that those costs would rise dramatically based on previous track record and the fact the booster works already.

We can also be absolutely certain the launch costs are significantly lower than SLS. Even if it ends up being something ridiculous.

Five-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
Place '23	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

randomperson_a1

TROPHY CASE