It would make an interesting theme for a novel, waking from a dreamless sleep only to face again the pains, disappointments and inevitable deterioration of this life, and this time separated from the people who once gave some solace. Don't sign me up.
Can, say, a Lisp macro be 'partially formed', in the sense that it can expand into some boilerplate that represents an incomplete syntax tree? (Whereas a higher-order-function is necessarily complete.) I can see that being useful, but not inasmuch a it's made out.
Say Clojure forgot to ship with the boolean "or". "or" should evaluate its arguments one at a time (to allow for short circuiting) and return the first non-false value. You could do this with functions, but you have the source-level overhead of manually wrapping everything, and performance overhead of defining and passing an anonymous function for each argument. With a macro, at compile time you just translate the "or" macro into a simpler form that uses "if". This is how Clojure actually implements "or":
(defmacro or
"Evaluates exprs one at a time, from left to right. If a form
returns a logical true value, or returns that value and doesn't
evaluate any of the other expressions, otherwise it returns the
value of the last expression. (or) returns nil."
{:added "1.0"}
([] nil)
([x] x)
([x & next]
`(let [or# ~x]
(if or# or# (or ~@next)))))I burned out some years ago and have been struggling with recovery since, depressive thoughts aren't far away but by now I've found coping mechanisms. It's annoying I don't feel I can talk about it with my real ID because I still don't feel like my performance and drive is even 80% what it used to be, and I fear that would impact my future chances of switching jobs if they discovered my inner struggles. But my performance seems to be enough for my coworkers to value me, so I keep going another day. I too almost lost my previous job during the early periods, but at the end of it I was valued again. (I just observe external praise, I never feel it. Whatever.)
I'm anti-big-med for myself, but I won't discourage you from taking them as a lot of people say they help and some even report total elimination of depressive thoughts. I would encourage you to see if extra caffeine helps you at all while you wait, especially as the big drugs tend to take 3-4 weeks before kicking in at all and caffeine seems to have a more immediate effect. How much caffeine do you take per day? If you don't take much, you may want to get a box of 200mg pills and try for 200-600mg per day and see if it helps you at all. Caffeine has some anti-inflammatory properties, and depression is increasingly being recognized as an inflammatory disease, plus caffeine as a stimulant itself can help with the focus. Anecdotally, what cripples me some days is never-ending introspection about my value to the world and my performance. Sometimes taking more caffeine than usual that day will allow me to shut my mind up about itself and think about other things, and that allows me to get things done. (Work, laundry, going to the gym.)
Last year I finally did start feeling like I was recovering a little bit, then my mom unexpectedly died. Expect life to continuously shit on you. But whatever. If you keep on keeping on you'll develop your own coping mechanisms (those that don't die) so even setbacks won't necessarily send you over the edge as you've been there before. Lastly, killing yourself in a nice way would take effort, it's not worth it. Just look forward to sleeping instead. You might also consider getting a pet, or a house plant -- something whose continued existence depends on your existence.
But really we just need anything that gets power, perceived or real, away from the People.[1][2]
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Stuart
[1] http://www.constitution.org/eng/patriarcha.htm
[2] http://www.amazon.com/Critique-Democracy-Guide-Neoreactionar...
Do we assume the user is going to notice that URL art style, and actually heed it? Because if the answer is "no" (and I think in reality, the answer would be "no"), then pick a high value site, and MitM it with a self-signed cert. The user misses the indicator, and proceeds to interact with the site; does JS work? (let's steal the user's cookies) do forms work? (please log in!)
Showing a big scary warning in one case, and not in the user, implies to the user that the browser has some reason to think one is more secure, which is misleading.
Wouldn't it just be significantly easier to simply change the URL art style to make clear that HTTP is "insecure." Like a red broken padlock on every HTTP page?
That has the following advantages:
- HTTP remains fully working for internal/development/localhost/appliance usage (no broken features).
- Users are reminded that HTTP is not secure.
- Webmasters are "embarrassed" into upgrading to HTTPS.
- Fully backwards compatible.
Seems like a perfect solution where everyone wins.
When the user first visits an HTTPS page with a self-signed cert, they get the content, and the URL art style has a broken lock or something warning it's not known to be secure. (It's better than raw HTTP but it's not trusted.) With certificate pinning by the browser, the next time the user visits that page, if it's different, then they get the current experience that warns them in big scary text and requires several clicks to get past. There's a question of if it's different in that the server owner upgraded to a paid SSL cert should it show a warning or not, but if there's a way to sign that upgrade with the old cert that the browser can know about there shouldn't be a problem...