Discussion

@[email protected] The thing that took me a long time and some rather awkward conversations to understand as a child growing up in churches, but with parents who believed in God rather than "membership of a domination" is how many people take "Christianity" enormously seriously without a hint of understanding or any desire to learn about what any thing actually means. Happy to dedicate large amounts of money and time to "church activities", but then astonished to learn that Jesus was Jewish.

That's before you get to the very intelligent people who actually try and formulate theology that justifies some of these things, who I manage to have an even lower opinion of.

PSA for couriers: the only upside of #ChronicFatigue is that I am at my home when you try and deliver. Could you at least ring the doorbell?

@[email protected] Yeah, yeah, but that only evens out the average for the ones that I say "I've got five minutes, I'll do this one straight away" and then take 3 days and a brief trip to accident and emergency.

@[email protected] Means skipping being raptured with the type of people who believe in the rapture. Maybe it's a better sales pitch than I thought?

@[email protected] "tickets to the rapture are running out fast!"

To be absolutely clear to all of the various people who follow me that 'the church' has often treated like shit: I do not believe my faith implies you have any less value (let alone less right to exist) than anyone else.

I am a Christian, and I'm not ashamed of it. Even happy to talk about it with people if they're actually interested. But it seems a telling judgement on 'Christianity' (the organised religion as it currently exists in Western culture) that by far the most common gullibility test opener I receive from spammers is 'are you an Evangelical'?

I have absolutely failed people from technical interviews for how they (didn't) respond to and respect my female co-interviewer. I have also seen candidates who looked good on paper crash and burn when interviewed by an all female panel as they were apparently incapable of treating them as humans.

mastodon.social/users/benroy...

And because I'm in a random music recommendations mood, have a track from Kardi that manages to win my award for "most relaxed groove to ever be performed with enough energy to power a small city". And I'm a sucker for traditional instruments in rock line ups, they always work surprisingly well (even if this is less rock than some of Kardi's other tracks)

youtube.com/watch?v=h3koYl3H...

I was reminded of this track recently and realised that some of you may not have been blessed of knowing "The Impresario" exists. OCReMix are a community who produce fan covers of music from games, and a lot of it is good - but 13 years ago a bunch of insane geniuses decided to take a scene from Final Fantasy VI that is (in game) an opera and turns it into a nearly 9 minute masterpiece of Bohemian Raspsody style rock opera. Treat your ears and give it a listen (and if you played the original game it even manages to carry the mix of emotional gut punch and completely surreality that the original scene evokes)

youtube.com/watch?v=7xFhULSt...

@[email protected] presses dislike button

@[email protected] Ah crap. Sorry you're having to deal with that kind of thing.

Is it common? Probably, although I've been out of the dating game for a couple of decades. Is it a useful red flag to let you know this person isn't mature enough for a solid relationship? Definitely. Important note though: I don't think having boundaries is the same as being transactional, and it can be worth some reflection on when certain actions are really one or the other.

For the avoidance of doubt on your examples: demanding an emotional response from you is not them having a boundary...

@[email protected] @[email protected] And in terms of time frame, it needs to go through both the EU level legislation process and then each member state needs to write and take through its own legislation process the actual national implementation. You should get from warning (and hopefully it may even be stopped)

@[email protected] It's a bit of a bummer that "vulnerable people who really need protecting" and "deeply unpopular people who don't like consequences" are helped by almost exactly the same feature sets 😞

@[email protected] @[email protected] "100 reasons why your world building is just fine. Number 22 will surprise you!"

Whelp. Turns out if you accidentally install the wrong version of Bonfire, realize, switch to the version you meant to run but forget to reverse the database migrations first... you can get into a situation where it starts recursively generating multiple access control rules on every incoming federation request as they aren't getting found and linked properly. How it was running at all with a couple of billion acl rows I'm not sure, but it is certainly responding a little bit more quickly now I've cleared them out.

@[email protected] Thank you! Couple of neat techniques in there I hadn't thought of. Unfortunately none that solve my current issue, but I suspect that is largely because I'll trying to do something impossible to work around the constraints of other people's code and preferences. I'm grateful for a second pair of mental eyes confirming I hadn't missed a simple solution though.

@[email protected] Unfortunately I don't know the difference as a fixed number; the level inbetween has a max-width set (and desired by the user) so the difference between its width and the "ancestor" depends on current viewport width. I was hoping there was some cunning way to infer it in "modern" css (I poke UIs occasionally, but the last time I did it full time was over twenty years ago).

Turns out searching for "make thing the same width as other thing in CSS" is surprisingly hard to specify tightly enough to get meaningful search results. Who would have thought...

Random #css question time, in the hope someone can save me from hours of experimentation!

I'm styling html I don't control, and I want to make a descendent element as wide as an indirect ancestor. Basically, there's "ancestor" (unknown width, not full viewport) > "some layers of divs" (narrower than ancestor) > "my thing" (I want this to be as wide as "ancestor"). Is this a thing it is possible to do with CSS?

@[email protected] While we're at it, can we make it international law that proposing a law requiring people who are unable to do work to regularly submit formal proof of being unable to do work should result in all government figures involved being slapped with a wet kipper and forced to use a copy of the proposal printed on archive paper as loo roll for a month?