City Pearl, Waterfront City, Marina City, BudaPart – csak hogy a legnagyobbakat említsem, de kisebb léptékben ott a Lake11, az Újbuda Reside
"Könnyen azt hihetnénk, hogy Budapest egy gyorsan növekvő lakosságú metropolisz; egy olyan város, amelynek folyamatosan új lakásokra van szüksége a népességrobbanás miatt. Közben az átlagos fővárosi négyzetméterár másfél millió forint körül jár, a bérleti díjak öt év alatt 70%-kal nőttek, és egyre több fiatal számára a saját lakás nem terv, hanem egyre távolodó ábránd. Budapest fogy, és közben mégis növekszik. Hogyan lehet ez?"
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
A tűzvédelmi hatóság megtiltotta a gyár további üzemeltetését.
"A hatóság azt követően hozta meg döntését, hogy július 2-án egy ellenőrzés során feltárták, a gyár SWS épületében a cég egy vezetéken levegőt fújt azokhoz az érzékelőkhöz, amelyek biztosították volna, hogy az aceton és az oxigén koncentrációja ne haladja meg az üzemben a robbanásveszélyes szintet."
I spent the afternoon arranging our books by size and color (and it’s so satisfying and looks amazing) and my partner came home and stared in shock at the bookcase and then said “i’m a librarian, you can’t do this.”
it has occurred me during this process that apparently not everyone thinks about books by what color they are? like, literally when i’m looking for a book, i picture it in my mind. i have a very…tactile experience with the books i read and idk! i thought everyone did that lol.
my partner was like “how will i find [this book] for instance” and i replied “easy, it’s purple” and he looked at me like i was a witch.
This actually is interesting in terms of information-seeking behavior, which is a thing librarians think about a lot and often actually study (some library jobs require you to publish, and academic librarians, for instance, will often use the students at the college they work at to study how they search for information in order to figure out how to best provide them services).
When you go for an MLS (Master’s of Library Science, which is a thing, and which is usually required for “professional-level” library work [which is also a weird and contentious concept that I won’t go into here]), one of the things you study is the organization of information. This deals with how to determine what a book or other material is “about"—a concept we tongue-in-cheek call “aboutness"—and how to convey that to a potential user of the item and make it easy for them to find. Things like keywords and subject headings, do I put this book about how often wild birds attack aerial drones in with books about birds or with books about technology, if its a fictional novel do I put fantasy in it’s own section or mix it in with all of the other fiction, so on and so on.
OP is organizing books by how they would look for them. OP’s partner is thinking in terms of aboutness. This is a system that works for OP because it’s their personal library: they know basically what books they own and they only own books that are relevant to them, and if they know what the book looks like, that can be a quick way to find it.
In a library that assumes the public (or people who do not own that particular collection of books) are using the collection, that doesn’t work. Books are often re-issued in multiple covers, or re-bound in new covers when they get worn out, and if the user doesn’t know what the book looks like or is expecting a different cover, they’re lost. That’s why non-personal libraries used standardized cataloging systems like the Dewey Decimal System or Library of Congress System to organize a book by what it’s “about”, and then put books about the same or similar topics together, marked with labels and signage so a person unfamiliar with the book or collection can find their way to it.
Basically, OP’s system works for their own personal library, because it’s best suited to how the primary user—OP themselves—looks for books. OP’s librarian partner is coming from a background of thinking in terms of a public-facing collection, where aboutness is the key criteria and communicating it to a user unfamiliar with the collection is the priority.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
lmfao I just saw zohran doing the inaugural swim in a full suit and tie, the schtick genuinely gets funnier the more he does it. My only complaint is should have worn swim trunks OVER the suit
Sok mindent láttunk már közérdekű adatigényléseknél, de a módszerük így is váratlan volt.
KURVA JÓ!!!
Végre valaki kreatív volt újságírószívatásban!
Kiadták az adatokat ->felrakták egy Sharepointra.
Randomnév generálta zip-ekben, amiket külön - külön lejelszavaztak, majd a randomnév generált fáljneveket + a jelszavakat elküldték ÖSSZEVISSZA sorrendben egy 40 oldalas pdf-ben :-)
"aekf9JK3ineapnePW42bbHeo3Tjbvk2.zip" "+6755#+VmTJ-/Deo"
Rogán Tóni amikor olvassa hogy ő csak exceleket nyomtatott ki, fénymásolt majd szkennelt vissza:
Remélem Sarolta gyorsan utánanézett és már tudja, hogy SharePointból OneDrive-val be lehet szinkronizálni a fájlokat a saját diszkre, a 444 fejlesztői közül pedig bármelyik jobb képességű egy órán belül ír egy szkriptet, ami a fájlokhoz kiválasztja a jelszólistában levő megfelelő jelszót és kicsomagolja a tartalmát.
A rádió irányítása Kerényi György kezébe kerül, az online részleg vezetésére Mészáros Zsófiát, a régi Index egykori főszerkesztőjét és a 444 korábbi vezető szerkesztőjét kérték fel
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
in law school, my mom took me to this stress retreat because my family was vaguely aware i was a suicide risk. and they didnt allow phones, so i brought this huge bag of books. and one of the options for "destressing" was this fake cave grotto thing, where they'd decorated a room to make it look exactly like an underground cave and the air was like -10 degrees, but there was a like 4ft deep pool in the middle that was kept super super hot, so you would just switch between the hot and cold. and they would bring you an endless supply of this weird syrupy drink thing that was like super caffeinated and tasted like sugar and mint. and so i spent multiple days sitting half submerged in this fake grotto drinking mystery liquid and reading. and i have to be honest i really did feel less stressed
CARDiac, syntax coloring, view source and vibe code
If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:
In the mid-1970s, my dad – then a budding computer scientist, subsequently a math teacher – brought home my first computer: the CARDiac, a Turing-complete, all-cardboard papercraft computer that you could write and execute programs on:
CARDiac stands for "CARDboard Illustrative Aid to Computation," and it was created in 1968 at Bell Labs as a way to teach high schoolers how computers worked. I wasn't anywhere near high school age (I think I was in third grade?) but the CARDiac was revelatory. The year before, I'd had access to a teletype terminal and acoustic coupler that let me operate a PDP machine at the University of Toronto, and I'd been endlessly fascinated with the possibilities. I wrote simple BASIC programs, chatted with ELIZA, and messaged other system users, one keystroke at a time, all on paper (the terminal didn't have a screen, just a printer, and we fed it 1,000' rolls of paper towels my mom brought home from her kindergarten classroom, which I then rolled back up so she could put them back in the bathroom for the kids to dry their hands on).
Interacting with a computer in real-time was captivating, but it wasn't until I assembled and used the CARDiac that it all snapped into place. With the CARDiac, you composed simple programs with pencil and paper, then followed instructions that directed you to move paper tokens in and out of various slots representing memory cells and an accumulator. All an electronic computer does is repeat these crude mechanical operations, millions of times per second, using microscopic transistors. None of that action can be observed with the naked eye, of course. If you had a very sensitive multimeter and a very good microscope, it's conceivable that you could indirectly watch this intricate dance, but only on very early processors, and only if you drastically slowed down their operations.
Much later, I learned a word for what I got from the CARDiac: legibility. Together, the CARDiac and I made a working digital computer, with me standing in for the physics that propels electrons down the endless labyrinth of a microchip, like a pinball triggering various blooping, beeping bumpers. Though the computing we performed was sub-trivial (adding one and one was a major undertaking!), the physical performance of that computing imbued me with Fingerspitzengefühl ("fingertip feeling"):
This stood me in great stead in the years to come. To this day, when I think about my computer, I sometimes imagine those little cardboard tokens, shuffling in and out of the slits in my paper CARDiac. There's something very reassuring about this imagery. No matter how many levels of abstraction sit between me and the nanoscale transistors ranked in their billions beneath my fingertips, they are all undertaking those familiar operations I painstakingly performed on my child's desk all those years ago.
(This is one of the things that makes Science Comics Computers: How Digital Hardware Works such an amazing kids' book! By illustrating how a computer's operations are built up from simple boolean logic that can be represented as physical switches, the comic performs that same legibilizing magic that I got from the CARDiac:)
Not long after my CARDiac experience, my dad brought home an Apple ][+, which came with a schematic that revealed the inner workings of the machine in ways that I found visually striking, if significantly less accessible than the CARDiac:
(For me, at least. For the legendary hardware hacker Andrew "bunnie" Huang, it was the start of a journey that turned him into one of the world's virtuoso reverse-engineers and science communicators):
The Apple ][+ did very little when you took it out of the box. It came with a few floppies' worth of demo programs, and we bought a few more down at the local computer store, but most of the programs I ended up using with that machine were ones I typed in myself, from magazines I bought at the corner store (I spent half my magazine budget on Cracked, Mad and Crazy, the other half on computer magazines full of BASIC program listings).
Typing in a program, keystroke by keystroke, was another Fingerspitzengefühl-generating exercise. I wasn't much of a typist, so it was slow going, and of course I made a lot of typos. What's more, BASIC had already fragmented into several dialects by this point, so even a correctly typed program could fail to run until it had been adapted for the BASIC that shipped with the computer. Getting a program to run on my computer required me to hone my typing skills, but even more so, my problem solving skills.
After months of this, I (re-)invented the debugger, from first principles, coming up with lots of little tricks and gimmicks (many of them horribly inefficient) for identifying and solving my programs' errors. In later years, I had lots of opportunity to work with real debuggers, created and maintained by trained programmers who'd forgotten more than I would ever know about writing code, and my own cack-handed efforts to build my own version of their tools conferred a confidence and intuitive understanding that I could not have achieved otherwise. Figuring out the need for a debugger and then rolling my own (crude, inefficient) one made all debuggers more legible to me.
I think that "legibility" is an underrated trait. If a system is legible to you, then you have a superior basis for understanding it, improving it, and making it work again when it breaks down.
There's an old joke that goes, "physics is applied math; chemistry is applied physics, and biology is applied chemistry" (I've also heard versions that start with "math is applied philosophy" and carry on to "sociology is applied biology," etc). While this isn't entirely true, there's something profound in it: we understand and manipulate our complex reality by wrapping it in abstractions that package up a writhing, shuffling, vibrating machine inside a smooth, serene membrane with a sturdy and easily grasped handle. You could do chemistry using the tools of physics, but it would take hours to perform the kind of calculations a chemist does in seconds (just as it takes an eternity to add one and one with a CARDiac).
Nevertheless, there are times when it is useful for a biologist to think about chemical processes, and for a chemist to think about interactions at the level of physics, and for a physicist to do math. The membrane and the handle are essential, but sometimes you have to decap the sealed package and inspect and manipulate its internals directly. Problem solving, improvement and maintenance all require the ability to move up and down the stack of abstractions to figure out where to stick your probes and stage your interventions.
This is where legibility comes in. Interacting with physical processes improves your mental model. In Broad Band (a magisterial history of women in computing), Claire Evans talks about how the first programmers were women who did the "unskilled" labor of physically cabling components together, developing powerful Fingerspitzengefühl, with such high-fidelity, trans-abstraction mental models of the machines' operations that they became the world's best programmers and debuggers:
My early adventures in programming were so powerful and instructive because nearly all the programs I interacted with on my Apple ][+ were written in BASIC (not just the ones I keyed in, but also the demo software and much of the packaged software we bought). That meant that I could get a listing of any program I was using, peeling open the membrane to look at the machinery underneath. I could even laboriously trace the operations of that program using my toy debugger. This, too, was legibility: the ability to flip between the effects of the running code, and the instructions themselves (and then to mentally map those instructions onto the movement of cardboard tokens in my CARDiac).
This affordance was repeated later on the early web, thanks to the "View Source" function that came built into every browser, acting as a velcro tab for the membrane that separated rendered web pages from their underlying instructions. In my early years as a web developer, I copied, pasted, adapted, probed and traced HTML in ways that would have been instantly recognizable to the younger me, keying in those BASIC programs and ripping apart the commercial software on my computer.
I read somewhere that the Bell Labs scientists who created the CARDiac were worried that, thanks to transistorization, the next generation of programmers wouldn't understand the physical, material processes that unfolded when their programs ran, and that this would mean a loss of legibility and intuition and Fingerspitzengefühl. I can't track down the reference now, but it stuck with me, because the CARDiac is such a perfect way of preserving those virtues.
Modern computer science curriculum includes some chip design for just this reason (just as chemists study physics and biologists study chemistry). But there are plenty of programmers – better programmers than I ever was or will be – who taught themselves and never had a CARDiac or gave much thought to chip design. They work at different layers of abstraction and in different ways to solve different problems. Maybe they could improve their art by tinkering with FPGAs, but there's always something even the most skilled artisan can do to round out and incrementally improve their craft.
In the same way, there are plenty of programmers – better ones than I ever was or will be – whose journey started at higher abstraction layers than a teletype terminal or a CARDiac. Maybe they started with a browser's View Source, teasing apart other people's Javascript to create weird Myspace customizations. Maybe they tweaked a programmable block in Minecraft. Maybe they modded a Scratch game. Or maybe they recorded macros using Applescript or Hypercard or Visual Basic to automate a routine task, only to later open up the source code generated by the macro recorder to make fine adjustments.
Whether you're pasting source from Stack Overflow or recording a macro in Excel, you are just one operation away from unwrapping the membrane and exposing the code beneath it. And with the modern internet, with Wikipedia, with endless tutorial videos, you are one further operation from penetrating the high level code to get at the code beneath it, and the code beneath that, and the code beneath that, all the way down to the bare metal.
Which brings me to vibe coding. As I've written, there's a world of difference between writing code for production and writing "personal software" that solves a problem you have. Whatever deficits that code has (due to the fact that you're not a skilled programmer) are offset by the fact that you're the one making the tool (which means your needs aren't lossily filtered through a programmer's understanding of those needs):
There's nothing wrong with code that solves your problem, even if you don't know how that code works, even if it breaks in a couple of years, even if no one else could maintain, extend or debug that code. Personal software is fundamentally different from software made to be used and maintained by others:
Higher-level abstractions are necessary. Moving tokens between the slits in a CARDiac is a powerful exercise, but eventually you want to do something more substantial than adding one and one, and so you need to package up the mechanics of computing inside a membrane with an easily grasped handle (knowing that you can always open the membrane if need be).
The more automated code you generate – macros, pasted Javascript, Minecraft blocks – the greater the likelihood that you will be failed by a readymade, prefab component. At that point, you have means, motive and opportunity to open the membrane and start tinkering with the internals, and every time you do, you have a better chance of making a realization that improves your grasp on the whole system.
Automated code – whether from an LLM, View Source, Stack Overflow, or a macro recorder – is the top of a funnel. Many – most – of the people who enter the funnel won't slip further down the abstraction chute. They'll solve their problem (a virtue unto itself!) and move on. But the more people we put at the top of the funnel, the more chances our civilization gets to produce another skilled artisan who understands and can improve, iterate and repair the code the rest of us use.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
ez a tegnapi egy kivételesen jól sikerült céges bebaszcsizás volt. nem tudom, hogy nem lettem rosszul, pedig ittam mindenfélét is.
aztán még az irodából hazarollereztem az üres városon át, az is tök jól esett.
tudtátok, hogy van egy bébi-mamutfenyő az óhegy parkban? na, eddig még én sem, pedig már a múlt évezredben is sokszor jártam a parkban, még amikor szovjet-magyar barátság park volt a neve :D elmentem mellette több ezerszer úgy, hogy csak egy fa a sok közül.
Azert ne nagyon rollerezgess iszogatas utan, mert a legkisebb baj, ha a rendor elveszi miatta a jogsidat, a rosszabbik, ha valakit elutsz kozben, es mutetek sora var ra, meg ujra kell tanulnia jarni, es emiatt egyetlen forint bevetele sem lesz, aztan jarkalhattok a birosagra karteritesi per miatt is.
Legyetek, kerlek, felelossegteljesebbek es szabalykovetoek! Ki lehet birni alkohol nelkul is barmilyen bulikazast. Ittasan, jarmuvel akkor is veszelyesek vagytok, ha azt gondoljatok, rajtatok kivul senki nem letezik olyankor mar az utakon. Egy ketmillios varosban eltek. Kerlek. 🙏
nem véletlenül nem azzal mentem a belvárosba, hanem csak az üres utcán hajnal 2 kor mentem vele haza. egyébként sem voltam olyan állapotban, hogy elüssek bárkit, vagy magamtól pofára essek.
Vartam a megmagyarazast, de a szondat az sem erdekli, ha csak egy fel pohar bort iszol elotte. A rendor elveszi a jogsid. Autoval se menj ittasan sehova sehany metert, rollerrel se tedd.
oké, de pl biciklivel ugyanezt már lehet. aha. nem azért mert az veszélyesebb, vagy sem. vagy pl. Ausztriában simán megihat az ember egy sört és még vezethet autót. ugyanaz az ember, ugyanazt a sört, itthon meg tömeggyilkos bűnözővé válik... teljesen életszerű. nem gondolod, hogy a vaskalapos ragaszkodás a szabályokhoz nem a valódi célt szolgálja?
Jonak mondod, lelekben egy befottes uves testalkatu sztk frizuras nemet konyvtaros vagyok, aki az utolso paragrafust is kerlelhetetlenul szigoruan veszi, viszont velemenyem szerint a roller onmagaban veszelyesebb jarmu, mint a bicikli, mar a kialakitasa miatt is. Egy biciklivel rovid fektavon belul is biztonsagosan meg tudsz allni, ahol egy rollerrel ilyenkor arccal landolsz elore egy apro kavics miatt is.
Meg ha mindenki ennyire szabadosan meg rugalmasan kezeli a szabalyokat, mintha azok otletek meg javaslatok lennenek, akkor ne csodalkozzunk a mindenfele halalos baleseteknel. Mindig lesz valaki, aki tul vaskalaposnak tartja a szabalyt, onmagat meg sokkal vaganyabbnak meg figyelmesebbnek a valosagnak, foleg ittasan. En egy fel pohar bortol is tok vagany vagyok meg szorakoztato, de kozben meg benabb is es idegesitobb is. Tudom, mi mindig jobban vagyunk masoknal, lehet, hogy ittasak, de sokkal jobbak abban is, rank maskepp hat a fizika, a kemia meg a biologia, en is sokkal jobban vaganyabb vagyok barkinel, es sokkal jobban idegesitobb is. Jo, jozanul is, de JOBB VAGYOK BENNE MASOKNAL!
Szaz szonak is egy a vege: vagy iszol, vagy vezetsz barmilyen jarmuvet. Tok konnyu megjegyezni. Ha iszol, buszozz vagy taxizz. Ha jarmuvel vagy, lazits alkohol nelkul. Koszonom.
az ilyeb nem vaskalapos megoldas van texasban pl: siman legurulhat ez-az, de ha balesetben vagy résztvevő és kiderül a dui, akkor jajj neked. es a legkisebb baj lesz a buntetoeljaras, mert jon a sertettek biztositoja mivel a tied nem fizet szerzodesszeges miatt es a sertettek polgari perei. a gatyat is leperelik es eleg gyorsan csodbe jutsz te is meg a csaladod. meg 3 generacio leszarmazott. de cserebe nem vaskalaposak.
előjött itt az érv, hogy na de bezzeg biciklin, szóval
van egy olyan tippem, hogy az ország legtöbbet bicikliző tíz százalékába tartozom, de a húszba tuti, szóval kérlek, így higgyétek el nekem, becsszavamra mondom, soha nem ültem még biciklin alkohol hatása alatt, pedig az még csak nem is annyira veszélyes, mint a roller. megváltozik a valóságérzékelés, a reakcióidő, nagy vörös nem
Nem is értem, hogy merülhet fel bárkiben az, hogy piásan biciklizzen, amikor sok esetben a járás se sikerül. Bringával, ha nem viselsz sisakot és rosszul esel, abba bele lehet dögleni. szín józanul. Akkor miért növelné valaki a kockázatot azzal, hogy még rádob egy kis alkoholt?
Mindenbe bele lehet dögleni, a bicikli az autózás és a gyaloglás között van sok szempontból, például az alkohol esetén közelebb a gyalogláshoz. Nyilván az autóval tonnás vasat küldesz emberek közé, tehát nincs jogod kockáztatni mások életét.
Biciklivel az esetek döntő többségében csak a saját életedet kockáztatod és azt se annyira nagyon azért a biciklizés még a budapestihez hasonló rettenetes autózási kultúrában és rendes bicikliutak nélkül is egy elég alacsony kockázatú dolog.
Biciklizni csatak részegen nem biztonságos, de pár sör után, néhány év rutinnal simán működik, ettől még nem kell taxit hívni. A biztos gyaloglás képességénél több kell a biztonságos bringázáshoz, de bőven nem annyira, mint amennyi autóhoz, vagy motorhoz kell.
(A sisak az utolsó védvonal, a biztonságos jól karbantartott bicikliút, jól karbantartott bicikli, kordában tartott autósok, közvilágítás, városi bringás rutin és egy sor másik dolog sokkal fontosabb, a sisak ezeket nem váltja ki, különösen autós-biciklis ütközésnél. A nem biciklizésbe sokkal valószínűbben halnak bele az emberek, mint a biciklizésbe, akár sisakkal, akár sisak nélkül.)
