i would say the c-code is broken because the queue push method has undesirable behaviour when capacity is reached. for example if you push onto a full task queue then it just leaks a task without any feedback to the caller that something very bad has happened. you don't even need to look at the method body to see there is something weird going on. because its a fixed size task queue with a void return on the enqueue method. though, i guess its possible the task queue could be resized in the body.

probably, the push method should return a boolean indicating whether the task could be enqueued and if the capacity is reached then the task is not enqueued. but this is c so its very easy to write buggy code :) also, in this case the caller has no obvious safe way to check whether the queue method is safe to call so the author can't claim its up to the caller to verify some pre-condition before enqueuing a task.

or try to travel to an islamic country with an Israeli stamp on your passport or an Israeli passport.

agreement on raising the minimum wage is suspect because its a controversial econ position and presumably some form of UBI or 'negative income tax' is a much better alternative which would have the redistributive effects of a higher minimum wage without the 'tariff' downsides. like we have recently heard why its a very bad idea to artificially raise prices but apparently we are unable to extend this analysis to the minimum wage.

I suspect the commit to fix is:

https://github.com/facebook/react/commit/bbed0b0ee64b89353a4...

and it looks like its been squashed with some other stuff to hide it or maybe there are other problems as well.

this pattern appears 4 times and looks like it is reducing the functions that are exposed to the 'whitelist'. i presume the modules have dangerous functions in the prototype chain and clients were able to invoke them.

      -  return moduleExports[metadata.name];
      +  if (hasOwnProperty.call(moduleExports, metadata.name)) {
      +    return moduleExports[metadata.name];
      +  }
      +  return (undefined: any);

It could also be https://github.com/facebook/react/commit/7dc903cd29dac55efb4... ("This also fixes a critical security vulnerability.")

It does the same thing here, too: https://github.com/facebook/react/commit/7dc903cd29dac55efb4...

I think sortition is a great idea but you would probably need a constitutional amendment if you wanted sortition in Congress or the Senate. I think the State's have some discretion over how elections are run but I don't think its enough discretion to allow appointment by RNG. I think the strongest argument you could make is its an election where everyone is forced to vote for themselves and tie-breaks are chosen by RNG but I don't think that would be valid because I assume the courts would demand electors execute some agency.

The text of the constitution for electing congress says:

> The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States

and there is something similar for the Senate after the 17th amendment. I think pre-17th amendment States may have been able to use Sortion to appoint Senators but it would not have been legally enforceable. The State legislature could pre-commit to elect Senators by Sortition but then they could bail out and just decided to choose who they want when it came to the actual selection.

I am definitely not a lawyer, but "chosen... by the People of the several States" does not say the method of this choice. If the people of my state decide that the RNG decides, is that not "chosen by the People" of my state? Or if we still hold elections but one of the choices on the ballot is "RNG-chosen candidate"?

sortition is just democracy but with a weird probabilistic form of voting

As opposed to the determinism we have now?

my guess is something like detailed in this article: https://meaningness.com/geeks-mops-sociopaths

aws has security groups as well. using NAT for a firewall is overkill.

if the government wasn't incompetent in how they are handling certain immigration issues the anti-immigration parties would not have any momentum. for some bizarre reason the government is pursuing a course of action that is poisoning the well when it comes to immigration in the UK. i think immigration can bring a lot of benefits to the UK but by bringing in poor performing migrants into the UK it can end up turning the public against all immigration.

The anti-immigration parties have made immigration the cause of all our problems when it's the cause of practically none of them. Now the government are wasting time appeasing idiots who believe everything they read on X instead of actually focussing the real problems in the country. Anyone that believes Nigel Farage can come up with a functional plan to solve a single fucking problem is in for a surprise if he's ever in power. Unfortunately it shouldn't be a surprise because the last time they backed him it was a disaster too.

the gateway endpoints are free (s3 + dynamodb?), but the service endpoints are charged so that could be a reason why people don't use the service endpoints. but there doesn't seem to be a good reason for not using the service gateways. it also seems crazy that AWS charges you to connect to their own services without a public ip. also, i guess this would be less of an issue (in terms of requiring a public ip) if all of AWS services were available over ipv6. because then you would not need NAT gateways to connect to AWS services when you don't have a public ipv4 ip and I assume you are not getting these special traffic charges when connecting to the AWS services with a public ipv6 address.