Yeah. ‘lib’ isn’t a standard Python library, it’s the name of the abomination that this person created. Since python has quite a bit of useful introspection, they can do something like:

• get the stack
• find the exact call to abomination.add()
• reparse the text of that line, turn the text of the comment into actual numbers, and add them

Now, I don’t know if python keeps the comments around, so it may involve getting the filename and line number, reading the file, and manually extracting the comment text from that line.

capability is fine. Conflation is stupid. You can also use code to erase itself, but thinking that’s a good idea is generally wrong. But to remove that, you also remove the general ability to erase files.

Sure, but let’s just clarify that this is someone going out of their way to create this problem, using Python’s ability to read it’s own code.

Basically, you can load any text file, including a source code file, and do whatever you want with it.

So, a function can be written that finds out whatever’s calling it, reads that file, parses the comments, and uses them as values. This can also be done with introspection, using the same mechanism that displays tracebacks.

Good point.

This is a much more reasonable argument than most.

But third and fourth-gen nuclear are excellent sources of constant energy that don’t require storage, and some of which have a tiny percentage of the waste stream of prior generations, and what waste they do produce is problematic along the lines of 400 years (as opposed to 27,000 years).

You have two votes, and they matter: where you work, and where you spend your money.

Late stage capitalism.

The issue is that capitalism fundamentally requires forward thinkers and enlightened (or at least rational) perspective to function sustainably.

But capitalism rewards short term thinking, everywhere from corporate leadership, to the workforce, to the consumers caught by ads designed to catch and hold their ever-shortening attention spans.

Fundamentally, it needs regulation to thrive. The true cost of a purchase, including environmental and decommissioning/disposal costs must be tied to the initial purchase value. Through this, we might get a functional capitalism.

Nice.

Mawwage… Is why… We aw gavowed… heea… Twwoday.

Marry her?

And of actual wizards, thank you very much. And none of this is accidental - effeminate punk nerds are good company, and people who look like wizards… …help prevent assassinations.

You’ve been savagely attacked by an internet monster.

…and chill.

Did you even read what I wrote?

Those few Dems are clearly the ones pushing this. But that it should be bipartisan and should have more support in general has nothing to do with false equivocation.

The irony here, though, is that because of your partisan BS, you clearly interpreted that as an insult to the Democrats.

Those three Democrat are focusing on the thing all of the Democrats and Republicans should.

Sry bers onli

I’m saying that if you believe there is no all-loving, all-knowing, etc god/force/nature to the world, then just live whatever your best ideals are. Love, goodness, selfishness, hate, rage at a bullshit god - it doesn’t matter. Each will fail. But the experience of living that ideal, consciously, is valuable.

“It” is the ideal, or principle, or perspective you live by, and invest your time and energy into. But I don’t think you need to do something specific. I don’t think a person can intentionally let something go until they’ve lived enough of it, and that can’t really be rushed or stopped.

So, if that is the case, then if you actually value something - love, or good, or selfishness - be that, and be it to the whole of your ability. It will fail you, and you’ll have to move on. Be it until you can let go without having to shove it away. It will be an option for you - something you’re familiar with, that you can draw upon, genuinely, when it fits.

Do this enough, and the love grows, and you see why love is. Not only that, you’ll start to see the massive impact that the mentality you project has on the actual events you run into in life - and once you see it, you gain more insight into it, and how to work with life, love, etc, including when to stand against it.

Rage on.

Yep. Love doesn’t care for good or evil, just what it takes to care for those whom it loves.

God can only be all knowing, all loving, and all powerful if the power is distributed between three aspects that have imperfect communication. Or, if there’s atemporal consent, or the present situation for any given individual is the desired one, or that the overall situation (including lack of knowledge) is the one the person would choose, were they to have access to more information. Or any combination of the above.

So yes, while there may be aspects of truth in the all-loving, all-knowing, all-powerful mythos, it isn’t internally consistent unless you assume the overall, correct picture isn’t the way people typically see the world. And the way people view god sometimes - to be able to live without the consequences of living - is less accurate even than a fairy tale.