For now I'm letting that backend access my files directly. The front end can also play YouTube music (free, using the yt-dlp method).

None of this is public yet so right now I don't need anyone's approval.

I collect song metadata from various places (genre, instruments, track credits, rating). I also scrape charts by year, genre etc.

Then I run an ETL job on the json data I have downloaded, pre-building queries for extremely fast lookup tables. This gets saved to Duckdb, which is used by my go web ui/api.

It's very early days, and I only spend one or two hours a week on it, but right now it's amazingly useful. It had roughly 80k song metadata. To preview the suggested songs I ended up building a very cut-down YouTube music player, except that the playing song has all the metadata right there, and everything is a link that can take you to the artist, composer, instrument, genre, album etc. It's a great way to "wander through your collection".

Unfortunately this is only useful to me, because I targeted the music I listen to.

Next step is to download lyrics and extract song meaning, keywords etc. Then use MusiCNN, (or CLAP,OpenL3, HTSAT) to extract embeddings. Finally train my own model for nearest-neighbor retrieval based on a mix of metadata, giving the user the ability to tune it on the fly.

But here's the problem. This whole phenomenon is most prevalent in western style democracy. You cannot take that person's vote. You can engage with them and try to change their mind (but also be open to having your own mind changed too, otherwise it's a disingenuous enterprise). Or you can eject block and cancel. If anything, that just drives them further from your social/political group. Hence the person who you blocked and cancelled starts to look around at the other "so called evil people" outside the bubble, and realise that many of them might be refugees from pleasantville , just like you. You can only see your former bubble after your pushed or pulled out of it.

Bubbles can suck people in, but they can also push people out into the gravitational pull of other bubbles.

Identitarianism is a cancer, that has been fed via social media algorithms. We seem to have invented a machine for rewarding all of the wrong incentives. Who would have thought that phenomena like audience capture & polarised thought bubbles would be in the palm of the hand, directing thoughts and forming unbreakable opinions on an array of issues that otherwise wouldn't even be on the radar?

I don't think that this is a left, right or in between thing. Identitarianism had infected the entire political spectrum.

BTW: Perhaps I'm wrong but I don't take the Wikipedia definition of "identitarian movement" and identitarianism. I'm thinking entirely about identity politics. "If you're associated with person X you must be Y", or "If you believe A you must be a B". Highly policed thought bubbles. Ostracism. Cancelling.

As a result, today, with technology that can enable mass communication of thought, there are important conversations that can no longer happen in society.

IAM is just complex. I can't think of any implementation of "users, groups, roles, policies, identity providers, oidc" that is truly simple.

I'm reminded of a guy I worked with, who fought against Kubernetes adoption because it was "too complex", only to slowly reinvent Kubernetes badly, adhoc, out of vault, consul, systemd, nomad, iscsi, ansible, jenkins, puppet, bash, spit, glue... making lots of mistakes along the way. You think you don't need to implement some feature until you do.

Another thing I'll say about AWS (having been the sole infra guy at a few startups) is that it's well within most people's abilities to learn it. And you can usually avoid the shitty stuff. You think lambdas stuck? Don't use them! You could use EKS, ECS or bare EC2.

I watched them. They don't want to hang around longer than necessary. They will only approach a bike rack that is clearly visible from the road. They will only steal a bike that has unobstructed access to the road (no tricky bollards or other bikes to get around). Even though they are full of bravado, and shout obscenities and threats at me when I tell them to fuck off, they still run away (even though the one approaching the bikes is carrying a weapon while his companion stays on the scooter ready to escape)

Anything that even mildly inconveniences these guys is enough to stop them attempting theft. The bikes they steal needs to be expensive, out in the open, with direct access to the road, and with a shitty lock. And believe it or not, those tumblers line up a lot.

Throwing a blanket over a bike is probably enough to stop them from even approaching it.

"Acceptance of Iran's nuclear enrichment rights" (enrichment to what degree?)

"Termination of all International Atomic Energy Agency Board of Governors resolutions against Iran" (what does this actually mean, that they tear up previous reports and findings? Ignore undeclared nuclear facilities and unaccounted for uranium?)

I mean, are Iran basically asking that they be allowed build nuclear weapons unchecked? Or is there another way to read this?

But I run with my heart rate low, I don't like exceeding 150 on these runs.

But if you look at creative writing, story arcs are all about obstacles. A boring story is made interesting by an obstacle. It is what our protagonist needs to overcome. A one-man-band game dev who simultaneously holds the story and the technical challenge their head, might spot the opportunity to use a glitch or limitation as, I dunno, a mini game that riffs on the glitch.