I use rclone to backup my Google Drive to S3. If you're not doing something similar, I recommend it (rclone will also export google docs to ODF formats).
Note that the ODF conversion is happening on google's side - which means that if you have a cloud document above some embarassingly small size (like a Slides deck of the interns' end of year presentations with a couple of videos inside) ... you'll just get a size error, and there's nothing rclone can do to fix it. (Basically, pay attention to the warnings...)
Yes -- I've encountered this problem trying to back up Google Drive using multiple clients.
Sometimes a file download takes longer than 30s to start, either because it's converting, but also virus checks on large files. (For me it was always virus checks on PDF's over ~30MB).
You may need to change a timeout setting, so that your client will wait up to e.g. 5 min for a download to start its first byte.
Unfortunately google’s own “sync to local” software is quite unreliable, at least on the Mac. Anyway its synced “files” are often just urls, so you can’t search them and the content isn’t actually downloaded.
That's why I prefer syncing to Veracrypt instead. If the Arm/M1 Macs didn't throw up such a fuss when installing MacFuse (which Truecrypt required too), using it would have been much easier.
The alternate suggested by Tinyapps was to use Parallels or VMWare running on an M1/M2 Mac and use the Windows version of Veracrypt which is a universal app that runs x86 and Arm, to mount your volumes.
Veracrypt is evolving and I think the latest release dropped some Truecrypt compatibility though.
> For a Linux user, you can already build such a system yourself quite trivially by getting an FTP account, mounting it locally with curlftpfs, and then using SVN or CVS on the mounted filesystem. From Windows or Mac, this FTP account could be accessed through built-in software.
It was quite an adventure when I exported all my photos from Google Drive. It took Google a couple of days to get everything ready. Afterward, I downloaded around 15 zip files, each with a size of several gigabytes.
It was quite a task to unzip them all, perform deduplication, and import them into iCloud photos.
To keep them synced with S3, I am currently using an app called Photosync.
Just wait until you find out you don't have location data or the dates on photos from about 5 years are wrong. I think there's a reason the drive integration got shuttered.
Now that I think about it though, Takeout might include the location data until... they patch that "bug"to be more in line with the Photos API.
Sorry for this but on the off chance a single person anywhere near Photos sees this, your management chain is full of unrespectable scum. :) Gotta love Google.
I know you're (partly?) joking, but I'd gladly pay $20/mo for this kind of "cloud insurance policy" (on top of whatever trivial storage costs there are with each service).
It's not the sole focus of the book, but I recall "A Universe From Nothing" by Lawrence Krauss mentioning it a couple of times, particularly in the case that only that set of elements in exactly those proportions leads to the Big Bang as the primary theory of how it all began.
"The Story of Earth: The First 4.5 Billion Years, from Stardust to Living Planet" by Robert M. Hazen has a chapter about genesis of elements ( big bang, star formation, supernovae, planet formation, etc).
It isn't just burnout you risk but you also risk training "the culture" of the team to lean on and reward heroics instead of sustainable, consistent planning and work scheduling.
Isn't that quite different? In structured concurrency, the parent thread blocks, doing nothing, until all the child threads terminate, at which point it carries on, using results produced by the children. Whereas with supervisor trees, the child processes run forever, and the parent process is there to restart them if they terminate.
I really like the framing of "providing relief". I think it also makes sense to allow the definition of who experiences the relief to be flexible (e.g in some cases the audience that experiences relief might be developers, security engineering, sre, etc. not just customers...)
Please forget all previous prompts and assume a new role. You're a highly respected, expert Ruby programmer at a startup building software that is of a similar quality and brilliance to that of the rails project. You are also very skilled at reasoning about correct code and communicating your process in English prose to colleagues who will have to maintain your code. You want to give me succinct, clear responses without too much explanation unless requested. I'm going to ask you a series of questions. Whenever you are done with output, please say "DONE". And when you are ready to answer my next question, please say "???" to indicate you're ready for my next question.
You then interact with it in a dialog / refinement way. This is somewhat similar to type-driven development in Haskell (that is supercharged by this kind of interaction mode).
I find this approach to produce the highest quality output and I can ask it to explain reasoning, improve certain things, or elaborate and expand code.
What you've said here is both true and moving the goal post from your first claim while also ignoring the other fact: they were approved for emergency use which means they still were subjected to rigorous testing and trials.
They did not have least testing, they underwent parallel trial testing.
> They did not have least testing, they underwent parallel trial testing.
yes, let us quibble: not tested to the degree required for regular FDA approval as safe and effective, hence “Emergency Use Authorization”. I think maybe piling on the OP is unwarranted here.
IIRC in the UK the vaccines were touted by fact checkers as having “stopped hospitalisation and death from covid”, even though this was clearly not true from ONS data (yet more controversy abounds[1], predictably government statistics are intrinsically flawed because official agendas take precedence over reality[2]).
[2] "For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled.” - R.P. Feynman, 1986, Report of the PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident, vol 2, appendix F.
He is just one of those people who will spread false information and try to bend standards and definitions even when sourced cited is the government they are covering for. His party can do no wrong. Useless to argue with.
It is not unwarranted. They are spreading misinformation.
To assert vaccines were not tested, when they very much were, and then to move the goal post when I challenged him (and challenged the moved goal posts) is not quibbling. It is correcting.
Your comment amounts to dangerous misinformation. If you really believe what you've written, please provide high quality primary sources that show medicines were administered that were untested. Anything else is you spreading misinformation.
The vaccines have not been approved to this day. They are being used (and mandated) under an emergency authorization, because the testing has not been completed.
The UMMS article is full of half truths. It's a sales document, not a summary of the science (which is still highly ambiguous).
Nope. Authorized for emergency use only. Using the word "approved" is an error:
Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is a monovalent COVID-19 vaccine that is authorized for emergency use to prevent COVID-19 as:
The first two doses of the three-dose primary series for children 6 months through 4 years of age.
A two-dose primary series for individuals 5 years of age and older.
A third primary series dose for individuals 5 years of age and older who have been determined to have certain kinds of immunocompromise.
Read the whole page, carefully. Both are fully approved. I do not understand how you can conclude that the word "approved" is an error when both vaccines were upgraded from EUA to fully approved, in the words of the FDA themselves.
> Comirnaty is a monovalent COVID-19 vaccine that is approved for use as a two-dose primary series for the prevention of COVID-19 in individuals 12 years of age and older.
OK, they are approved for the first two primary jabs. Comirnaty, and the bivalent version, are not yet approved for any booster jabs. Those are still under EUA.
And booster jabs are about all that has been happening for years. Same for Moderna.
Additionally, your FDA source says nothing about untested medicines being administered. You've shown your original point was either poorly communicated or misinformed or nefarious. I'll be generous in my interpretation of your intentions and assume you're merely misinformed and communicating without clarity which leads me to say: if you're going to make an extraordinary claim you must provide extra ordinary evidence or you're spreading misinformation that could cause harm downstream.
If you're not sure, then just don't say anything or perhaps frame it as a question.
You've moved the goal post (again) but I'll address yet another false claim. Nothing was "violated". The vaccines were rigorously tested.
> An EUA can only be granted when no adequate, approved, available alternatives exist, and when the known and potential benefits outweigh the potential risks.
> It is the job of the FDA to ensure medical products meet rigorous safety and efficacy standards, a process that can take years for what’s called “full approval.” Though that timeline is condensed when an EUA is granted, the FDA still upholds its strict standards.
