Ferk

It’s also not that uncommon of an acronym in web tech, all the first results when searching “PWA” are consistent and it’s a very common way to refer to that technology. The term PWA has made the news in tech channels a few times before (like when Firefox discontinued support for PWA on desktop).

Even if they said “Progressive Web Apps” it would not have been immediatelly clear what that means for anyone who is not familiar with what PWA is. It’s also not the only acronym they use in the article without explaining it (eg. “API”, or “iOS” which is also an acronym on itself), it just so happens that it’s likely not a well known one in this particular lemmy community where the article was posted. The author advertises himself as a writer dedicated to web technologies (PWA and Web Component in particular), so it would be silly if he has to explain what those are on every of his posts.

Were the earlier series not focused on shared values to more or less a similar extent too?
Kirk has usually been given the reputation of being a rule-breaker, often ignoring Starfleet rules when they are in conflict with his values. Even off-camera (in DS9 I think) they attribute him 17 temporal violations, and I think he has been accused of violating the prime directive multiple times.

I feel it’s a balance. Each operation has a purpose.

Rebasing makes sense when you are working in a feature branch together with other people so you rebase your own commits to keep the feature branch lean before you finally merge it into the main branch, instead of polluting the history with a hard to follow mess of sub branches for each person. Or when you yourself ended up needing to rewrite (or squash) some commits to clean up / reorganize related changes for the same feature. Or when you already committed something locally without realizing you were not on sync with the latest version of a remote branch you are working on and you don’t wanna have it as a 1-single-commit branch that has to be merged.

Squashing with git merge --squash is also very situational… ideally you wouldn’t need it if your commits are not messy/tiny/redundant enough that combining them together makes it better.

Same effort as getting &* and () on a US layout (so, modifier key + 7 8 9 0, respectively), the difference is you press AltGr instead of Shift as the modifier. And i’d argue its actually easier to press AltGr with the thumb than shift with the pinky.

I use EURkey, which is basically a superset of the US layout extended to support symbols from several European languages.

it’s even ISO standardized

Not only are there other ones that are also ISO standards when it comes to software layouts, but funny enough, when it comes to physical layouts, US keyboards normally follow an ANSI standard (not an ISO one), whereas many non-US keyboards typically follow a physical key layout known as “ISO Keyboard”, so one could argue those are more of an “ISO” standard.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Physical_keyboard_layouts_comparison_ANSI_ISO_KS_ABNT_JIS.png

right ctrl + left shift + 9 will do?

No keyboard layout uses ctrl like that… in fact, I don’t think you ever really need to press more than one modifier in any standard non-US keyboard. Unless you have a very advanced custom layout with fancy extra glyphs… but definitelly not for the typical programming symbols.

ISO keyboards actually have one more key and one more modifier (“AltGr”, which is different from “Alt”) than the ANSI keyboards.

In fact, depending on the symbol it might be easier in some cases. No need to press “shift” or anything for a # or a + in a German QWERTZ keyboard, unlike in the US one. Though of course for some other ones (like = or \) you might need to press 1 modifier… but never more than 1, so it isn’t any harder than doing a ) or a _ in the US layout.

Even if they did hallucinate answers, it wouldn’t be the first game that relies on the “unreliable narrator” trope.

Then check-out their due date, specially if they have been left out in a stack for too long, before you pop one out.

Many hosts allow you to set rules to protect branches from getting their commits removed in the remote (in fact, I think that’s the default for gitlab main branches) or to prevent people from pushing their commits to them directly.
I expect even “the main branch has to stay more or less in sync with origin/main” can be automated… though it might not be what you always want, depending how you work.

git switch

Oh wow, I didn’t know about this one. I guess it’s relatively new?

Is it just a convenience command to try and be more specific (less multi purpose) than git checkout for switching branches or does it bring any extra benefit? …I’m already quite used to my git co alias, to the point that it’s almost hardwired to my fingers by now :P

coders revealed to 404 Media that “some of Kirsina’s Instagram posts are word-for-word copies of Sizovs’ LinkedIn posts, sometimes published more than a year later.” In addition, “some of the images [Kirsina] posted on Instagram show computer monitors with code that show her logged in under Sizovs’ name.” But perhaps most striking is the fact that an administrator told 404 Media that both Sizovs’ and Kirsina’s accounts were banned “multiple times” by the Lobste.rs coding forum for “sockpuppeting”—using a false identity to deceive others—in 2019 and 2020.

Lol… for reference, this is the twitter account: https://nitter.net/UnicornCoding

It’s full of advertisements about the DevTernity conference… as does the instagram, which has so many professional-looking photos that feel like she was an actual model, always with different backgrounds. Is the laptop wirelessly streaming to the ultrawide screen in her Twitter profile picture? because I see no cables, she’s not even connected to a charger, how long of a coding session can you have like that?

It’s also kinda annoying to have a history full of “merge” commits polluting the commit messages and an entwined mix of parallel branches crossing each other at every merge all over the timeline. Rebasing makes things so much cleaner, keeping the branches separate until a proper merge is needed once the branch is ready.

I don’t know… even if a game runs perfectly on Linux desktop (which should deserve a high score on ProtonDB) that doesn’t mean it will run well on the Steam Deck (ie. readable at 800p, with Steam Deck controls & limited in processing power).

So I think it’s worth it to have a specific categorization for that, specially if it’s linked to an official review process by Valve, with a greater direct incentive for game companies to comply to pass verification and get their official stamp. After all, Valve could still have an eye on the ProtonDB score as part of their internal review process if they wanted, before deciding whether or not give official approval.

IMHO, what Valve should do is be more strict when assigning “Verified” status. For example, Jurassic World Evolution 2 does not deserve to be in that category with such unreadable tiny pixelated messy UI at 800p and poor performance (and even in ProtonDB many people are giving it a good score, despite how some people acknowledge these problems). It would be ok to place it in “Playable”, but not “Verified”. Personally I don’t think it’s an issue to have unverified games that “work fine”, the problem is when “Verified” games don’t really work as well as you’d expect.

Personally, while I appreciate when people add a "snippet of explanation", I do prefer that to be in the comments. Not as the main text of the submission.

Making it part of the submission can feel like editorializing. If I want to read the artice, I read the article, if I want to read opinions / interpretations of the article, I read the comments.

Using the "text snippet" for opinions or interpretations can cause bias… and it also might encourage people to repost the same content multiple times just so they can post with a different bias.

I think the comment section is a more organized and suitable place for that. It also allows people to use their votes to decide whether the opinion/explanation deserves the upvote, separatelly from whether the link itself deserves promotion.

I think it's also safe to presume that in the ultra future tech advanced society of Star Trek, they can remove the bacteria that causes body odor in humans.

A lot of odor-causing bacteria are actually beneficial for us though. And what causes Vulcans to experience that "odor" might not be coming from bacteria to begin with… for all we know it might be one of the thousand of compounds that leak into the air we exhale directly from our lungs.

Virtually every gas or volatile liquid is susceptible to cause odor. The only reason we interpret pure water as odorless/tasteless is because water is everywhere so our senses evolved in a way that it doesn't trigger a response. There are many other compounds we don't really perceive because we are used to them at the concentrations that exist in our breath.

If let's say an alien species is not used to having 78% Nitrogen in their atmosphere, and they happen to have receptors sensible enough, then being in a ship with breathable air similar to Earth might just make them puke in disgust after having a sniff of what we might consider "clean air".

I'd argue it'd make more sense for everyone to wear the equivalent of a high tech mask (supressants?) rather than having to re-engineer the biology of the species every time they encounter an alien that might have a different set of compounds they might find unpleasant.

deleted by creator

Me neither? That’s why I was hoping they might have added some markdown extension.

I have done it in the past with mardown-it-wikilinks npm package, for example.

Also, I’d argue the wikilinks (internal links) using [[any term here]] from Wikipedia, that optionally allow automatically inferring the link, is much more comfortable (and less error-prone) for the usecase of a wiki system, than the [text required](/link_here_also_required_even_when_redundant) from markdown.

I was hoping they might have added some markdown extension to do something similar, but it seems not.

Free version is excluded. No charging tiny side projects, or students or something, it only affects already paying customers.

Wasn’t the free version already excluded from the changes before?

What they have done for the Free version is set the limit to 200k (it was 100k before) and they’ll no longer be requiring the Unity logo to be shown, even on the free version.

I mean, it would technically be possible to build a computer out or organic and biological live tissue. It wouldn’t be very practical but it’s technically possible.

I just don’t think it would be very reasonable to consider that the one thing making it intelligent is that they are made of proteins and living cells instead of silicates and diodes. I’d argue that such a claim would, on itself, be a strong claim too.