Doc Avid Mornington

A lot of us did, actually.

when you would literally get a slip of paper that showed you the lyrics.

Insert “If Those Kids Could Read, They’d Be Very Upset” meme here.

I mean, that’s just a bad library interface. With a halfway decent interface, you can do something like

query('insert into foo (status, name) values (:status, :name)', ent)

No orm required. With tagged templates in JS, you can do

q`insert into foo (status, name) values (${ent.status}, ${ent.name})`

Even wrap it in a function with destructuring to get rid of ent:

const addFoo = (q, {status, name}) =>
    q`insert into foo (status, name) values (${status}, ${name})`

Typescript can add type safety on top of that, of course. And there’s the option to prepare a query once and execute it multiple times.

Honestly, the idea of manipulating XML queries, if you mean anything more fancy than the equivalent of parameter injection, sounds over-complicated, but I’d love to see a more concrete example of what you mean by that.

Postgres has the having clause. If it didn’t, that wouldn’t work, as you can’t use aggregates in a where. If you have to make do without having, for some reason, you can use a subquery, something like select * from (select someCalculatedValue(someInput) as lol) as stuff where lol > 42, which is very verbose, but doesn’t cause the sync problem.

Also, I don’t think they were saying the capability having gives is bad, but that a new query language should be designed such that you get that capability without it.

This has some real “crimson eleven delight petrichor” vibes.

I’m not sure you’re talking about the same thing billwashere was talking about, but I’d like to hear more of your thoughts.

Hmm, a quote I quite like myself. Let’s see. I have defined two groups. I have not suggested that either group should not be bound by the law, nor that either group should by better protected by the law than the other. In fact, this entire part of the discussion is predicated on the law, which one group has imposed on the other, applying equally.

I remember, so clearly, a conversation, debate, argument, with a relative, at a funeral ffs, in 2016. He was a Trump supporter. I was talking about all the awful, terrifying, heartbreaking things that Trump was indicating he would do. My relative said just that. None of that will happen, you’ll see, it will all be fine. Literally every one of those things happened. The indications of much worse things are even stronger this time. Wake up. None of that will happen, if, and only if, we fight like hell to stop it.

Who are the wrong people? Have people similar to them offered significant resistance to past fascist regimes?

Do you think that’s a realistic way to keep sufficient modern Internet traffic moving?

It’s not just men who support forced birth.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/244709/pro-choice-pro-life-2018-demographic-tables.aspx

I appreciate the intent of your correction. For most abortions, yes, blastocyst. I’m not an expert, but I think that the body will usually safely flush out a failed blastocyst, and as the article said, many of these absolute nightmare scenarios cannot be diagnosed until well past that stage, so in this context, I think fetus is correct.

The only way they will “see the light” is if they look around their states and see no women; see no educated individuals; see no hard working youths; and see no business

I mean, they won’t “see no women”, women are nearly as likely to support forced birth as men. They don’t really care about the rest of that. They’d be quite glad to not have any opposition anymore, and be able to keep all those juicy senate seats and electoral college votes. Since they already have created an extremist Supreme Court, this would guarantee they wouldn’t lose the ability to veto or filibuster any attempt to fix it, while said Court continues to impose their views on the rest of the country.

*fetus

The thing is, I don’t really care what people “deserve”, or what they “don’t deserve”. How should I know? I’ll be a dork and quote Tolkien: “Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment.”

But I do care about who’s in the pact. We have an agreement, between us, we decent people. We watch out for each other. We protect each other. Or if we can’t, when something terrible is done to somebody, at the very least, we speak out, in protest, in sympathy, in sorrow. And the people covered by this pact, as far as I’m concerned, are the people who follow it - that’s it, the sole criteria for membership, about the lowest bar possible.

I’m not going to force somebody to carry a dead fetus because they forced other people to do so, but when the cruel laws they always thought would only apply to other people suddenly apply to them, I don’t owe them my sympathy either. They aren’t in the pact.

It’s important to spay and neuter our pets, but the dogs deserve to have their balls treated more respectfully than that.

Cut to Mrs Claus baking a spice cake:

She’s all alone, all alone, in her time of spice

But it’s a categorical error. The analogy is about “git”, not “git repositories” or “DVCS repositories”.

I’m not sure how including a final semicolon can protect against an injection attack. In fact, the “Bobby Tables” attack specifically adds in a semicolon, to be able to start a new command. If inputs are sanitized, or much better, passed as parameters rather than string concatenated, you should be fine - nothing can be injected, regardless of the semicolon. If you concatenate untrusted strings straight into your query, an injection can be crafted to take advantage, with or without a semicolon.

Are you claiming that wanting to make antidemocratic rules more democratic is authoritarian? Who wanted to ignore the popular vote? And how, exactly, does the comment you replied to suggest that Bernie was entitled to the nomination? The voters are entitled to get the candidate they want.