That kindof makes sense to me: If I drop something into a post office’s mail box (outside or inside) after the day’s last pickup, even if the mail is inside the post office, it’s not going to be touched by USPS hands until the next day that the post office is open.
This can be tricky. For example, at the Stanford post office, the drop boxes outside the post office have Saturday pickup times, but the ones inside the building do not (the signs inside warn about this).
In the past this used to be handled explicitly: courts, tax offices, municipal administrations, and patent or trademark offices had special mailboxes whose internal compartment switched every hour. That way, the time of deposit itself was objectively recorded and legally relevant, even outside office hours.
The same kind of mailbox was sometimes used for bid submissions in tenders, to prove whether an offer was submitted before or after the deadline.
> For example, at the Stanford post office, the drop boxes outside the post office have Saturday pickup times, but the ones inside the building do not (the signs inside warn about this).
That’s counterintuitive though. I can see why people miss the sign.
not familiar with the specific PO at Stanford, but I'm assuming the "ones outside" are the traditional drive up blue boxes that are also emptied/collected from the outside. I could see having these picked up by a truck on the way to a regional office without having the driver also need keys to collect from a location that is not open at the time of collection.
Someone somewhere probably figured out that it’s more efficient to have five drivers ride in a loop all day than to have each post office drain the boxes inside their postal map.
But it’s weird for a pleb to look at a box directly outside an office and assume that office isn’t responsible for that box. Outside a corner coffee shop, sure, but I can see the post office, it’s right there.
Again, your "right there" is just your assumptions you know the inner workings of the USPS. Maybe there was no Saturday pickup at that location until the outside boxes made it possible. This means no increase in that location's budget for paying people to do this. Now, it is part of the regional location (or similar) while at the same time now being able to offer a convenient Saturday pickup for those that use this location.
Not every location offers the same services. It's part of life. The complaining here is coming across as very privileged whining. Do you wish to speak to a manager?
And you’re ignoring the part where you’re blaming the customer for not reading someone else’s mind.
This is feeling like a work argument where the apologists are trying to block UX of DX improvements due to contempt for the people it’ll help and I am full up at the moment. Argue with yourself, I’m out.
well, if there's some "not reading" happening, it's you with the the rest of the comments upstream stating there is signage that clearly states there is no Saturday pickup.
Delivering the mail to a drop box is a task often done under duress. This is the same reason we in software have Five Why’s. Someone sitting calmly outside of the problem will always find a way to blame the victim for not reading the instructions. That doesn’t absolve the builders from their share of the guilt.
The "all nodes connecting to all other nodes" setup reminds me of NUMALink, the interconnect that SGI used on many (most? all?) of their supercomputers. In an ideal configuration, each 4-socket node has two NUMALink connections to every other node. As Jeff says, it's a ton of cables, and you don't have to think of framing or congestion in the same way as with RDMA over Ethernet.
SGI's HW also had ccNUMA (cache-coherent Non-Uniform Memory Access), which, given the latencies possible in systems _physically_ spanning entire rooms, was quite a feat.
The IRIX OS even had functionality to migrate kobs and theor working memory closer to each other to lower the latency of access.
We see echoes of this when companies like high-frequency traders pay attention to motherboard layouts and co-locate and pin the PTS (proprietary trading systems) processes to specific cores based on which DIMMs are on which side of the memory controller.
> After 12/24 months, cut a new semver-major release. People notice the semver-major through the dependency management tools at some point, an maybe they have a look at changelog.
As an example, I always knew urllib3 as one of the foundational packages that Requests uses. And I was curious, what versions of urllib3 does Requests pull in?
That is exactly the kind of dependency specification I would expect to see for a package that is using semver: The current version of urllib3 is 2.x, so with semver, you set up your dependencies to avoid the next major-version number (in this case, 3).
So, it seems to me that even the Requests folks assumed urllib3 was using semver.
I would almost expect the 3 in urllib3 to be the major version and if something needed to break it would become urllib4. Which, I know, is terribly naive of me. But that is how psycopg does it.
That was how psycopg2 did it, but now the package is psycopg (again) version 3, as it should be. Python package management has come a long way since psycopg 1 was created.
urllib2/3’s etymology is different: urllib2’s name comes from urllib in the standard library.
In the player, click the gear to select from a range of languages.
reply