@itsericwoodward@itsericwoodward.com Well I clearly suck ๐คฃ putt.day #62 โณ 22/12 +10
๐ก๐ข๐ก๐ก๐ด๐ด๐ก๐ข๐ข๐ข๐ก๐ด๐ด๐ข๐ข๐ข๐ก๐ข๐ข๐ข +2
https://putt.day/s/b4UKsjw0olkS
Free daily 3D mini golf in the browser? I smell a new obsessionโฆ
putt.day #62 โณ 10/12 Eagle
๐ก๐ก๐ก๐ก๐ก๐ก๐ก๐ก๐ก๐ข
https://putt.day/s/1VAFIDIxqpbT
Disclaimer: Canโt guarantee that Iโm fully awake and Iโm being trained at work not to use my brain anymore, so maybe this is complete bullshit. ๐ช๐งโโ๏ธ
It says here that SQLite uses signed integers:
https://sqlite.org/datatype3.html
In pure bits, 1 << 63 would be 0x8000000000000000, but as a signed value, it gets interpreted as -9223372036854775808. Subtracting 1 yields -9223372036854775809 โ but that doesnโt fit in 64 bits anymore. Itโs possible that SQLite doesnโt want to wrap around but instead saturates? Havenโt checked. ๐ค
With 62 bits, there is enough room.
With 1 << 64, I have no idea how SQLite wants to handle this, because this should immediately trigger a warning, because it doesnโt fit right away. Maybe it gets truncated to 0?
sqlite> select printf('0x%x', 2 * (1 << 64));
โญโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโฎ
โ printf('0x%x', 2 ... โ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโก
โ 0x0 โ
โฐโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโฏ
sqlite> select printf('0x%x', 0 - 1);
โญโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโฎ
โ printf('0x%x', 0 ... โ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโก
โ 0xffffffffffffffff โ
โฐโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโฏ
sqlite> select printf('0x%x', 0 - 2);
โญโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโฎ
โ printf('0x%x', 0 ... โ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโก
โ 0xfffffffffffffffe โ
โฐโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโฏ
Eehhh, what the hell is going on here!?
SELECT
printf("0x%x", (1 << 63) - 2),
printf("0x%x", (1 << 63) - 1),
printf("0x%x", 1 << 63 ),
printf("0x%x", (1 << 63) + 1),
printf("0x%x", (1 << 63) + 2)
SQLite yields:
0x8000000000000000 (instead of 0x7ffffffffffffffe)
0x8000000000000000 (instead of 0x7fffffffffffffff)
0x8000000000000000 (correct)
0x8000000000000001 (correct)
0x8000000000000002 (correct)
Huh!? O_o Am I stupid? What am I missing here? Or is this actually a bug? :-?
With 62 bits, everything is spot on:
0x3ffffffffffffffe
0x3fffffffffffffff
0x4000000000000000
0x4000000000000001
0x4000000000000002
And 64 bits rather unsurprisingly also yield:
0xfffffffffffffffe
0xffffffffffffffff
0x0
0x1
0x2
reviewing logs this morning and found i have been spammed hard by bots not respecting the robots.txt file. only noticed it because the OpenAI bot was hitting me with a lot of nonsensical requests. here is the list from last month:
- (810) bingbot
- (641) Googlebot
- (624) http://www.google.com/bot.html
- (545) DotBot
- (290) GPTBot
- (106) SemrushBot
- (84) AhrefsBot
- (62) MJ12bot
- (60) BLEXBot
- (55) wpbot
- (37) Amazonbot
- (28) YandexBot
- (22) ClaudeBot
- (19) AwarioBot
- (14) https://domainsbot.com/pandalytics
- (9) https://serpstatbot.com
- (6) t3versionsBot
- (6) archive.org_bot
- (6) Applebot
- (5) http://search.msn.com/msnbot.htm
- (4) http://www.googlebot.com/bot.html
- (4) Googlebot-Mobile
- (4) DuckDuckGo-Favicons-Bot
- (3) https://turnitin.com/robot/crawlerinfo.html
- (3) YandexNews
- (3) ImagesiftBot
- (2) Qwantify-prod
- (1) http://www.google.com/adsbot.html
- (1) http://gais.cs.ccu.edu.tw/robot.php
- (1) YaK
- (1) WBSearchBot
- (1) DataForSeoBot
i have placed some middleware to reject these for now but it is not a full proof solution.
Hmm:
42 75 69 6C 64 20 77 68 61 74 20 6D 61 6B 65 73 20 79 6F 75 20 68 61 70 70 79 2E 20 4C 65 74 20 6D 69 73 65 72 61 62 6C 65 20 70 65 6F 70 6C 65 20 62 75 69 6C 64 20 74 68 65 20 72 65 73 74 2E
user/bmallred/data/2022-10-05-04-01-18.fit: 8.62 miles, 00:09:29 average pace, 01:21:44 duration
user/bmallred/data/2022-09-12-13-26-16.fit: 4.62 miles, 00:10:00 average pace, 00:46:16 duration
user/bmallred/data/2022-08-25-08-53-11.fit: 3.62 miles, 00:10:13 average pace, 00:37:00 duration
user/bmallred/data/2022-08-08-07-55-58.fit: 4.62 miles, 00:11:31 average pace, 00:53:12 duration
user/bmallred/data/2022-07-16-05-16-42.fit: 4.62 miles, 00:11:17 average pace, 00:52:05 duration
Fun run with family: 2.62 miles, 00:14:02 average pace, 00:36:43 duration
Fun run with family
#running