As an aside, for very good analysis of current Chess games (as well as older sagas around certain legends of the game), I heartily recommend checking out agadmator's Youtube channel[1].
I thoroughly enjoy Stjepan Tomic's channel "Hanging pawns" (on YouTube) for more detailed analyses than Agadmator. Videos are long but excellent and (i find it an advantage that) he doesn't go with the latest hypes around chess only (i.c. Queen's Gambit tv show)
> Agadmator is a very charismatic speaker but he does very little analysis.
It's good enough for the vast majority of chess players. Most chess players are casual fans. They aren't interested in deep analysis. And besides, if you want analysis, you wouldn't want a youtube channel but stockfish or other chess engines and work through it yourself.
> He mostly just moves the pieces and says the moves.
Not true. Sure he tells you the moves but he provides analysis for the good parts. He provides highlights which is what people want. Nobody is going to sit through a detailed analysis of an 8 hour game.
It was tied to the beginning of Covid lockdowns as well. Chess has had a very strong year in terms of numbers coming to the game. Queen's Gambit seems to have exploded that again.
Not arguing that this could be used in an abusive relationship, but if we work on the basis that someone could install a similar program on their partner's phone that's not Google. There are a lot of pro's for the tracked person with the Google implementation.
Google email you quite frequently (I believe monthly?) to tell you that you are sharing your location and with whom.
You can disable it at any time. Obviously disabling such a feature in an abusive relationship may not be an option.
Literally just not having to do that. Or having to have someone request your location case-by-case. Also better resolution.
I’ve shared my location in one form or another with my girlfriend and now wife for a long time.
“Hey can you come pick me up?” “Sure, leaving shortly” — not only do we not need to play some game figuring out exactly where the person needing pickup is (which is a huge boon because she’s awful with directions), but for the person being picked up it’s like Uber—you can see if they’ve left, how far out, etc.
“You just about home?” — if we’re driving, we’re not going to respond to that. Instead it’s easy to answer a question like “when should I start supper”, even in the face of unpredictable traffic, just by checking the other person’s location instead of having to call and have them take a call while driving.
And just from a general safety perspective—wife and baby go for a mid-day walk and a simple “hey you got your phone on you?” gives us both some piece of mind. She knows if she’s not back in some remotely realistic timeframe and doesn’t pick up her phone there’s someone that will come find her, I don’t have to just sit at home and try and decide if it’s been long enough to file a missing person report or if she’s just run into a friend at the park and is too engrossed to notice her phone in the stroller. And none of this requires any planning or communication.
Also had previously shared my location with a good friend and business partner because when we were both travelling separately to meet with clients it made it a lot easier to coordinate, if you arrived early to be able to (accurately) say “oh he’s 5 minutes out” or see they were stuck in traffic and shortcut the awkwardness and just have the person who wasn’t driving be able to call and say you’d both be late instead of walking in and making awkward small talk forever, etc.
I’m not going to share my location generally, but sharing selectively can be extremely convenient.
Some of these paragraphs honestly sound like postapocalyptic anxiety horror rather than a regular care. Not my business ofc, but maybe it is worth to double-check that it's not an "overprotection" at your side.
You people are really honestly timing dinner for exact time partner walks into the door? In situation where partner is going home at irregular times? I cant imagine doing that and cant imaging expecting that.
> And just from a general safety perspective—wife and baby go for a mid-day walk and a simple “hey you got your phone on you?” gives us both some piece of mind. She knows if she’s not back in some remotely realistic timeframe and doesn’t pick up her phone there’s someone that will come find her
I took huge amount of mid-day walks with kids and playground trips with kids and never ever needed someone to go find me. I did not needed husband to check how long I am away or anything like that. What exactly is "realistic timeframe" for walk with kid? For me, it could take anything between 20minutes and 4hours depending on weather, kids mood or my mood. But I did not needed husband to rescue me from dangers of local playground or park, like not once.
I am not outlier, I do not know a single woman with baby in real life who would need that level or control in order to have peaceful mind. All these "realistic examples" make me wonder whether people did not normalized huge amount anxiety for themselves. Or they are made up.
>I am not outlier, I do not know a single woman with baby in real life who would need that level or control in order to have peaceful mind. All these "realistic examples" make me wonder whether people did not normalized huge amount anxiety for themselves. Or they are made up.
This seems really committed to pigeonholing the motivation for this functionally. All I can say is my partner and I use it all the time. We have irregular schedules and are not always checking our phones to respond to the other's "hey where are you text." We use Apple's version of this which is VERY clear that someone else can see your location, and requires explicit opt-in. The use case is convenience, not anxiety.
I am responding to people who make bonkers examples. Women goes for walk with baby and needs to know husband will retrieve her if she is late, for her peace of mind? Really? Absolutely no one is served by pretention that normal women are scared to take walk with babies unless someone is checking on them.
I would assume that if the location with your partner is not available for a bit, you wont turn into bundle of anxiety. Which is then, whatever.
But examples in this thread are different. People feeling unsafe because someone is late as usually. And that is neither normal nor healthy. And absolutely no one is served by trying to normalize that.
Not everyone lives in ideal situations either. Where I grew up, it wasn't unheard of for individuals by themselves or with a stroller to be attacked and mugged or worse. If you were going to go into old down-town to the plaza or walk the shops, it was a really good idea to let someone know where you were going and when to expect you back.
When I went to college, it was rather common for individuals in my physics program to ask to be escorted to their cars if they were in the lab after dark, due to a few incidents of assaults and attempted kidnappings in the dark parking lots. It wasn't restricted to gender lines either. Luckily better lighting and cameras were installed rather quickly after the rash of incidents, but that fear persisted for a while.
Just because you were lucky enough to live in an area where you were unlikely to be accosted when going out on your own, it doesn't mean that others have unfounded fears.
I checked stats. For women, 2 or of 5 murders are be partners. 15 times as many women were killed by someone they knew then by stranger. These are data from 2013.
So, if you live in place where kidnappings are the biggest danger, that place is outlier place. It is not so much that i an privileged for not worrying about it, it is that the city you are in is really bad.
Attempted kidnappings are basically non existent in most Western areas. I am sorry you lived in such places, but I really don't think that is normal. It is not normal to need someone going with you to car either, in most places.
Compared to that, controlling abusive partners are significantly more likely threat to most of us. That is relatively normal.
Traffic can take the commute home anywhere from about 30 minutes to over 2 hours on a regular basis. So yeah, generally we try and time cooking such that we're not eating cold food that's sat on the table for hours.
The _small_ park nearby is over 60 acres of fairly dense woods with signs posted at all the entrances warning of bears and other wildlife. The one a bit further down is over 1500 acres of similarly dense forest and trails. So yeah, we both appreciate knowing if we get mauled by wildlife or, more realistically, twist an ankle or something that there's someone that can come find us when we call or if we can't. A realistic timeframe is "roughly however long you said you planned on being gone", barring no further updates.
I really appreciate the implications that come with calling this "control". This is a bidirectional exchange of information that we both find convenient and reassuring given that neither of us really know anyone in this city and appreciate having a lifeline to someone we can trust.
Not that I should need to defend my relationship in the first place, but it was her idea to set up and, since it'll be your next issue, her idea to move somewhere where we don't know anyone. Especially now that we have a kid I would much rather be back where we had friends and strong family support.
For the two first points, Whatsapp lets you share your location for a small amount of time (either 15 mins or 1 hour).
It's very common when a group of people is going to hang out, so the rest of them that come a bit later doesn't need to go through the whole dance ("hey are you still at X place?" "have you moved?" "I can't see you" ) but still leaves you with privacy by default.
Many apps do it, I just use these two since I don't have Whatsapp.
That said, optimizing for privacy by default for an already limited allow-list is not the right way to conceptualize this. That need to explicitly make the choice to share is a friction point, not a feature. What if my friend forgets? What if it's needed over an hour? Why does my possibly tipsy friend need to decide how long I need their location for in the moment? On by default is an explicit feature once you explicitly allow, and the need to grant each time is a bug. Google's original product appeared to strike a balance here with the "on by default but possible to reject" model pictured in the article which is interesting. Still, they understood they made an on by default product and the user value clearly.
For friends father away on the social graph, those temporary shares are also great too! iMessage/Find My Friends has this and I use it exactly as you describe. But it's two separate use cases.
> Many apps do it, I just use these two since I don't have Whatsapp.
Careful, you are handing your gps location at all time (to facebook) with that option (using IOS). I like the feature but i'm not using it anymore, just one shot location sharing from me
Our family shares location with each other on Apple, mainly it gives our young teenagers a bit more freedom, and stops them from texting me when I'm in the middle of a rainy cycle home to ask 'are you coming home?'.
My wife also has a cup of tea waiting for her when she gets back from work, thanks to a Geofence I have set up.
I bike alone in the woods, and once beyond the initial few km it's quite unusual to see anyone else until I come back to the edge of the forest. It should be said I do prefer these less traveled sections.
Anyway, if I have an bad accident[1], I might not be able to operate the phone. Either the phone could get damaged or I'm passed out, hurt or similar.
Sharing the location in real-time with my gf, Google and possibly various governments seems preferable to lying hurt alone deep in the woods without anyone having a clue where I am.
[1]: Friend of a friend had a front wheel puncture in a turn at the bottom of a hill, causing him to crash into some rocks. By sheer luck someone found him. He was passed out. The crash crushed his jaw, and he sustained severe brain damage. It's years since and he's still not recovered 100%.
My wife is a pet sitter and pet sitting can actually be quite dangerous. She once got bit by a dog and called me to come and help. She was in too much shock to be able to explain where she was, and I'm absolutely terrible with directions so I was unable to locate her.
Thankfully, she managed to calm down and resolve the situation as it was only a small bite, but if the situation was worse and I would have been too late to find her. We thought that we can't let this situation happen again, so we now share each other's location just in case anything like that happens again.
It's also great knowing how far away she is so I can start dinner and have it ready for when she steps in the door.
Often I'll take the kids out for a walk, and my wife may or may not want to join us depending on where we are. Because she can easily look up my location, she can make that decision without needing to talk to me.
My wife can't message me (safely) in the middle of driving home so I know to start heating up dinner. Likewise she can't let me know when traffic gets snarled and she's going to be an hour late.
Does the phone support a voice activated digital assistant where you can speak to control the phone? "Hey Siri, message $ name I'm stuck in traffic, my ETA is $x."
We don't use voice assistants for privacy reasons. I'm OK with the tradeoff of my location being public because it's just not interesting (I alternate between work, home and the gym), but it's very important to me to not potentially have my verbal conversations leaked or recorded.
That's my tradeoff matrix, yours may be different.
I think you are misunderstanding. The secret does not need to be hardcoded in the python file. If it's read in from an environment variable or some other external source, it will also be in the pyc
Of course not, that would mean env vars are hard-coded into byte code at compile time, which would be completely crazy. A pyc file is just a parsed series of op codes that the interpreter could dispatch directly, so that it doesn't have to parse source files every single time.
Enjoyed the article. For once, this article showed some flaws in the original process/idea, and showed very nicely how an original seed idea turned into something different, and more involved/interesting.
Clearly a lot of work and sweat went into getting the results you did, and the final output looks very polished.
This is already the case for some carriers, Vodafone (when Passport is enabled) off the top of my head, and also Meteor. Has been the case for some time.
There has been an issue with data though, and I'm not sure the new proposal solves that. Also if you have a plan with minutes, they won't be included as minutes while abroad, you'll be charged, but at a standard home rate.
I recently did this manually by piping responses to a temp file called before and after, and then using vimdiff as my differ which proved quite effective.
This tool looks great, but would not have worked with my particular use case, which was doing some migration of user data, and diffing the user accounts to make sure that they had changed in the expected way.
It might be an idea to add the ability to query the same host twice, but have a user input trigger when to test each host.
I quite like this style of video, I have only watched the first ~15 minutes, but I find it a much more engaging way to jump right into code like this, or learn some Go while I watch.
I would love to see some popular figures in the open source world, talk us through a pull request etc. I would be surprised if it didn't drive a few more contributors to the project and if nothing else would be a powerful introduction to the project.
[1] https://www.youtube.com/c/AGADMATOR