text:
Danny Green Reveals What Warriors Players Said After Klay Thompson Injury
By Drew Shiller	• Published June 17, 2019 • Updated on June 17, 2019 at 4:16 pm
With a little over 2 minutes and 22 seconds left in the third quarter of Game 6 of the NBA Finals, Klay Thompson went up for a dunk in transition.
Raptors guard Danny Green met Klay at the rim and was called for a foul. The Warriors' shooting guard landed awkwardly on his left leg and remained on the ground in a lot of pain.
Klay landed awkwardly on the left leg pic.twitter.com/h4rLSXy0Za— Drew Shiller (@DrewShiller) June 14, 2019
NHL 10 hours ago
You know how the story ends -- a couple hours after Golden State lost, we learned that Klay tore his left ACL.
It was not a dirty play whatsoever by Green. Sometimes, bad things just happen.
On Sunday, Green discussed the unfortunate situation with media members in Toronto:
"He was going up for a dunk and he can jump. I thought he was gonna go up with one hand ... he went up with two hands and I think it's a little easier for me to get to the ball with him going up with two hands. It's hard to find the ball with one hand.
"I thought it was pretty clean. They called a foul ... I wasn't sure what happened and I just saw him grab his knee. You never know serious it is with him because he just walks through and plays through anything. The guy came back on the court like it was nothing with a torn ACL and shot his free throws.
"The rest of his guys, they were making sure that I didn't take it the wrong way or feel too bad or guilty about it. It was a clean play.
"They were like, 'We know you're not dirty.' Draymond [Green], Iggy [Andre Iguodala] they were like, 'Yeah, you went up for the ball. He just came down funny. It's not your fault. Don't even worry about it.'
"And I wanted to check on him at the foul line. He's like, 'I know you didn't do it purposely.'"
"I didn't know the severity of it until after the game ... I saw [Draymond] in the hallway after and he said it's an ACL and I was like 'Ahhh, sh--.' It's gonna be a long summer for not just him but their team.
"You never want to see those guys go down that way. They're special players and you don't want to see their careers changed, or be hindered or be over because of certain types of plays or injuries -- especially the ones you're involved in."
This was the exchange between Klay Thompson and Danny Green after Klay came back onto the floor to shoot the two free throws after already tearing his ACL pic.twitter.com/lMLeLVKZM0— Drew Shiller (@DrewShiller) June 17, 2019
This is INSANE! Klay argued with a Warriors trainer and tried to stay in the game. He then jogged back to the locker room, thinking he would get examined and then return to the court. The guy had a torn ACL! pic.twitter.com/5PbNaEF6tD— Drew Shiller (@DrewShiller) June 17, 2019
[RELATED: Draymond denies report that he visited Durant in New York]
Green -- who will turn 32 years old on June 22 -- just finished a 4-year, $40 million contract and is about to become an unrestricted free agent.
The most the Warriors could offer him next season is about $5.7 million so he is probably too expensive for the Dubs.
Follow @DrewShiller on Twitter and Instagram
Copyright CSNBY - CSN BAY


Tired of learning Japanese with textbooks?
Get yourself out of your language learning rut by getting into anime.
Maybe you're skeptical about this.
Want to have your fortune told?
Fortune telling is a common practice in many countries, and Japan is no exception.


text:
Q: How to Initialize a Web Component From Javascript? Let's say I have the following web-component:
<link rel="import" href="my-dialog.htm">

<my-dialog id='mydialog1' heading="A Dialog">Lorem ipsum</my-dialog>

See here for more info: http://cbateman.com/blog/a-no-nonsense-guide-to-web-components-part-1-the-specs/
and here: http://www.revillweb.com/tutorials/web-component-tutorial/
However, apart from attributes sometimes I'd like to initialize it with some object that has a bunch of properties for example:
var obj = { heading: 'hello there', data1: 123, name: 'blabla' };
//^^ this can be any type of data.. think some kind of data model here, and maybe I get this model from the server.

So I can't send the above object within my html via attributes, cause I might have alot of settings and/or I might get it at a later point from the server, so I need to do it in javascript.
So what I've been doing is I've just been taking the object after it has been created:
// initialize is a function I have inside my web component
$('#mydialog1').get(0).initialize(obj);

^^ And this works, initialize(..) is a function inside my web component.. But:
Question #1 I wonder if this is the correct way to initialize a web component, as it seems a bit messy.
Also, if one instantiates a web-component in code:
$('body').append("<my-dialog id='bla'></my-dialog>");
$('#bla').get(0).initialize(obj);

Question #2 Can I assume on the second line, that 'bla' has been created here with all its methods? (funny enough, this works but I thought maybe it'd be better to wait for some kind of event or something that the component is ready)

A: Because append has a synchronous(opposite of async) behavior, it will always work.
Do not litter your codebase with needless safety nets(events, polling...).
In short, right after .append is executed the element is present on DOM and you can query it with selectors and do whatever you want to do with it.

A: Like virtually all JavaScript methods, HTML appending is synchronous, which means that you can expect the correct DOM elements to be constructed when the function returns - if not so, the function would accept callbacks or return a Promise or similar. Thus, you can trust that the thing has been created and initialize it. And initializing it in this way is probably the best thing to do (though there might be a way to do it all in one line.)
If you feel the need to convince yourself that a given import method (anything that consults an external file) is synchronous rather than asynchronous, you can do the following on a *nix system:

*

*Create one named pipe and pipe yes to it. ($ yes >pipe1)

*Create an appropriate HTML (or JS or whatever) header that would make the output of yes (an infinite series of ys followed by linefeeds) syntactically correct for your situation.

*Create another named pipe and pipe the header followed by the first named pipe (using cat) to it. ($ cat header.htm pipe1 >pipe2.htm)

*Run your import method using the name of the second named pipe. (<link rel="import" href="pipe2.htm"> or var x = require("pipe2.js"))

Does your UI hang? If so, then it's synchronous. Does it keep on going? Then it's asynchronous.

A: Why are you setting the attributes via an object? I'd make settings and then pass them this way:
document.getElementById("someID").style.width = widthVar;
document.getElementById("someID").name = nameVar;
document.getElementById("someID").style.color = colorVar;

A: Instead of creating it in html:
$('body').append("<my-dialog id='bla'></my-dialog>");
$('#bla').get(0).initialize(obj);

You can also do something like:
var myDialog = document.createElement('my-dialog');
myDialog.initialize(obj);
$('body').append(myDialog);

A: Web components are designed to be interacted with via their attributes, this way they can stay truly interoperable.
If you get your data after you have added the component to the DOM you can still interact with the web component via attributes like this:
Let's say you have your dialog component already added to the DOM:
<my-dialog id='mydialog1' heading="A Dialog">Lorem ipsum</my-dialog>

So you can easily update this DOM elements attributes at a later time with JavaScript:
document.querySelector('#mydialog1').setAttribute('init-data', JSON.stringify(obj));

And then within the web component you can react to attribute changes as follows:
//Called when one of this components attributes change
    proto.attributeChangedCallback = function(attrName, oldVal, newVal)     {
        switch (attrName) {
            case "init-data":
                //DO SOMETHING WITH newVal
                var dataObj = JSON.parse(newVal);
                break;
        }
    };

This should give you everything you need. I'd seriously recommend writing your web components with ES2015 the code is a lot cleaner, see this tutorial: http://www.revillweb.com/tutorials/web-components-with-es2015-es6/
Hope this helps!

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Oops, and Other News
This is what happens when you touch the art.
Guess what, people? Your garden-variety, Norman Mailer–style, chest-thumping, self-aggrandizing narcissist is obsolete. This is the twenty-first century, and we have newer, more sophisticated, and more popular models for self-love. Kristin Dombek writes, "The narcissist is, according to the Internet, empty. Normal, healthy people are full of self, a kind of substance like a soul or personhood that, if you have it, emanates warmly from inside of you toward the outside of you. No one knows what it is, but everyone agrees that narcissists do not have it. Disturbingly, however, they are often better than anyone else at seeming to have it. Because what they have inside is empty space, they have had to make a study of the selves of others in order to invent something that looks and sounds like one. Narcissists are imitators par excellence. And they do not copy the small, boring parts of selves. They take what they think are the biggest, most impressive parts of other selves, and devise a hologram of self that seems superpowered. Let's call it 'selfiness,' this simulacrum of a superpowered self."
Say you're in this band—let's call it, say Metallica—and you release four earth-shatteringly seminal thrash-metal albums in the late eighties. And then you start to suck. And you persist in sucking. For decades. This is not, by ordinary standards, a sound business strategy—but what if, as Drew Millard suggests, Metallica is playing a very long game, profiting from toying with its fans' emotions? "I get the sense that Metallica fans wouldn't view the band's early material with such reverence if the band hadn't started systematically alienating the people who got them to the top. When it comes to fandom at least, hate is a far stronger emotion than love, and it seems like the further Metallica has drifted from its roots, the more incredulous the world has become that this group of sell-outs and lame-os could have once made such perfect, untouchable music. This relationship works in reverse as well: if the first four Metallica albums hadn't been so great, it wouldn't be so fun to hate on every move the band has made since then."
You're not supposed to touch things in museums, which means it's very fun to touch them. A rash of recent accidents—a kind of museum crime blotter, if you will—makes the allure of touching very apparent. There's the guy "who wanted to take a photo of himself with a sculpture in the foreground and a painting in the background. The visitor could not frame the photo to his liking, so he wrapped his arms around the abstract sculpture, which was the size of a person, and turned it on its pedestal to get the best angle." Or the boy who "smashed a giant Lego sculpture of Nick from Zootopia at an expo in Ningbo, China. The artist had spent days piecing it together, reports said."
Governments have attempted to neuter the appeal of cigarettes by doing away with their branding, insisting on generic packages in place of subtle marketing. But this misplaces some of the allure of addiction, as Rob Horning writes: "It seems more plausible that addiction generates its own rationalizations, its own myths, its own ideology. We need to experience a physical grounding for our ideological beliefs, and we need to have ideological excuses for our physical addictions, so they tend to work in tandem, symbiotically … Brands can seem like a way to add a phony value to an otherwise undifferentiated commodity. But they also mark the entry point for consumers into some vicarious fantasy, some idea tangential to consumption. The potential value of a brand rests in the conflation of compulsion and the desire to believe. It must make you feel as though you are choosing and also have no choice."
Today in fiction as prognostication: Did Daphne du Maurier's 1972 novel, Rule Britannia, predict Brexit? "In Du Maurier's imagined referendum the government has 'backtracked' on its original support for the Common Market and now opposes British membership. If this contrasts with the Conservative government's support for the Remain campaign this year, the book still has clear parallels with political events, according to Professor Helen Taylor, of Exeter University. She cites one section of the novel, in which the prime minister bemoans the political and financial repercussions of the leave vote, saying it 'brought great economic difficulties, as I feared would be the case and as I warned you at the time, and our political autonomy and military supremacy were also endangered.' "
kristin dombek
Magritte Shaving
Brushfire at Christmas
By Judy Longley

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl