I take care to wrap my commands in functions that export only for that scope. If you have exported variables in your bashrc it'll be shared with everything you spawn through your shell, including evil NPM packages.
Pandoc even poses codeblock execution as an exercise in their custom-filter documentation: https://pandoc.org/filters.html
The python package panflute is also really nice if you don't want to play around with haskell or the AST JSON directly.
Fraunhofer Institute for Digital Medicine MEVIS | Public sector collective wage agreement | Full-Time | Bremen/Lübeck/Berlin, Germany | DevOps Engineer
At Fraunhofer MEVIS we pursue a patient-centered and clinical workflow-oriented approach to solving clinically relevant challenges in image- and data-based diagnosis and therapy (e.g., MRI analysis and surgery planning). To deliver excellent results, our research and development teams increasingly rely on our on-premises cluster and cloud infrastructure to compile, test, and deploy our software products, or train state of the art deep learning models.
As a DevOps Engineer, you will join a motivated team and improve the on-premise infrastructure. Our daily work involves the HashiCorp stack (Nomad, Vault, Terraform), Puppet, Ansible, OpenStack, and more. Additionally, we support our research personnel with CI/CD setups employing Jenkins and GitLab.
For more information, visit our job board or contact me
directly:
What do you mean?
I tried placing Ö and {\"O} in the author's name of the example and tidied it:
Click Tidy to clean up the entries below
@Book{sweig42,
Author = { Stef{\"O}{n} SwÖig },
title = { The impossible book },
publisher = { Dead Poet Society},
year = 1942,
month = mar
}
This is the output:
Click Tidy to clean up the entries below
@book{sweig42,
title = {The impossible book},
author = {Stef{\"O}{n} SwÖig},
year = 1942,
month = mar,
publisher = {Dead Poet Society}
}
And \"O should be Ö, so I guess I do not really understand what is "incorrect" in your use case.
I know that the Zoteroplugin BetterBibTeX converts Ö to {\"O} when exporting as BibTeX, but keeps it as Ö when exporting as BibLaTeX – maybe Kbibtex has similar options?
edit: It actually "fixes" Ö to {\"O} if you tick "Escape special characters" or supply the command line argument `--escape`, which should be the default according to GitHub.
I meant leaving the Ö as is or even introducing it, which is always wrong with Bibtex. I'm not using Zotero but Jabref also fixes it. There was an Ö in an author name and when I manually changed it to {\"O} Kbibtex reverted it back to an Ö! It's easy to fix by switching to XeTeX but some editorial systems don't use it and will make your manuscript fail.
I was just hoping that the tool fixes this problem, too. Maybe in a future version.
In the example "Straße", the ß is, in fact, derived from an ancient ligature for sz.
Old German fonts often had s as ſ, and z as ʒ. This ſʒ eventually became ß.
We (completely?) lost ſ and ʒ over the years, but ß was here to stay.
Its usage changed heavily over time (replacing ss instead of sz), I think for the last time in the 90s (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_orthography_reform_of_1...), where we changed when to use ß and when ss.
So while we do replace ß with ss if we uppercase or have no ß available on the keyboard, no one would ever replace ß by sz (or even ſʒ) today, unless for artistic or traditional reasons.
Many people uppercase ß with lowercase ß or, for various reasons, an uppercase B. I have yet to see a real world example of an uppercase ẞ, it does not seem to exist outside of the internet.
For example, "Straße" could be seen capitalized in the wild as STRAßE, STRASSE, STRABE, with Unicode it could also be STRAẞE. It would not be capitalized with sz (STRASZE) or even ſʒ (STRAſƷE – there is no uppercase ſ) – at least not in Germany. In Austria, sz seeems to be an option.
So, for most ligatures I would agree with you, but specifically ß is one of those ligatures I would call an outlier, at least in Germany.
P.S.: Maybe the ampersand (&), which is derived from ligatures of the latin "et", has sometimes similar problems, alhough on a different level, since it replaces a whole word. However, I have seen it being used as part of "etc.", as in "&c." (https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%26c.), so your point might also hold.
P.P.S.: I wonder why the uppercasing in the original post did not use ẞ, but I guess it is because of the rules in https://www.unicode.org/Public/UCD/latest/ucd/SpecialCasing.... (link taken from the feed). The wikipedia entry says we adopted the capital ẞ in 2017 (but it is part of unicode since 2008). It also states that the replacement SZ should be used if the meaning would otherwise get lost (e.g. "in Maßen" vs. "in Massen" would both be "IN MASSEN" but mean either "in moderate amounts" or "in masses", forcing the first to be capitalized as MASZEN). I doubt any programming language or library handles this. I would not have even handled it myself in a manual setting, as it is such an extreme edge case. And I when I read it, I would stumble over it.
Actually, it needs to be uppercase "OK". I typed "ok" also, and scratched my head for a while. I get it should be obvious, but my brain just didn't get it right away.
I also remember having IPv6 in Germany for years now, but it came with lots of problems: routers cannot forward things properly, thus self-hosting at home becomes tricky, or playing games with friends without dedicated servers (yes, they still exist, no, not all support IPv6). It gets even worse with "DS-Lite", where multiple customers share the same external IPv4 address, to enable support for all the webservices not supporting IPv6 yet.
All in all, I had so many troubles with setting up anything behind IPv6 or DS-lite, that I asked my ISP to give me an additional IPv4 address, so that I don't have troubles. While they usually provide bad service, this came for free -- but other ISPs, for example my parents' ISP, want you to pay 50 or more euros per month for an "enterprise contract" to get a dedicated IPv4. I still haven't found a way for my dad to setup his old webcam server at home such that others can reach it from the outside world, and I tried every couple months over the last 6 years or so.
Besides provider sometimes have strange port rules it's not uncommon for them to forcefully change your IP from time to time, even if there is an open connection. It tends to happen at night and it tends to be a forceful disconnect from your router to the outside world for <5min.
At least I ran into this frequently (multiple times a week, I really need to fix my sleep cycle).
I considered such options before but if I remember correctly, the webhost does not allow SSH. However, I haven't checked for some time and I will definitely look into this, thank you!
Have you tried Tailscale? It is a quite simple way to create a private subnet to easily access servers behind a nat. Install a raspberry somewhere in your parents house and you can share the whole subnet with all the devices connected to the same account.
In [1], pages 10 and 11 are the actual directive, the rest is the reasoning. And, although I don't know the previous directives and regulations, it reads as if this is essentially an extension of an exception to the ePrivacy directive for another five years.
Birgit Sippel says in her statement to the president of the parliament [2]:
> Dieses Gesetz ist eine Übergangslösung für drei Jahre. Die Kommission hatte versprochen, noch vor der Sommerpause einen neuen, dauerhaften Rahmen für die Aufdeckung von Kindesmissbrauch vorzuschlagen. Jetzt dauert es noch bis September oder Oktober. Dafür erwarte ich einen deutlich verbesserten Vorschlag. Die langfristige Lösung muss sich mindestens an den Datenschutzgarantien der temporären Lösung orientieren. Sie muss zwingend Lösungen für das gezieltere Scannen privater Kommunikation finden, sonst wird sie vor nationalen und europäischen Gerichten kaum Bestand haben.
Translated (by myself):
> This law is a short term solution for three years. The commission promised a permanent solution to combat child abuse before the summer break. Now, this will take until September or October. Thus, I await a much better proposal. The long term solution must have at least the same guarantees for data protection as the short term solution. It [the long term solution] must have solutions for purposeful/targeted ("gezielt") scanning of private communication, otherwise it will not hold up in front of national or European courts.
So maybe things do not change that much right now.
But back to [1], I am especially curious about article 3(e):
> the provider annually publishes a report on its related processing, including on the type and volumes of data processed, number of cases identified, measures applied to select and improve key indicators, numbers and ratios of errors (false positives) of the different technologies deployed, measures applied to limit the error rate and the error rate achieved, the retention policy and the data protection safeguards applied
Do you know if and where such statistics are published? (today?)
People react strongly to such things because we’ve all lived long enough to see new powers targeted at bad actors eventually abused by law enforcement.
It's not overblown. The horror that is the "Patriot Act" was temporary, until it wasn't. It only expired in December 2020, 19 years later, because Trump threatened to veto it if he didn't get his way, and as a result it expired because nobody chose to vote on it. If I was a betting man, I would assume it's still in use even when expired.
