It’s not good for large architectural issues but it can point out nuanced issues in single files that often wouldn’t be caught otherwise
Yeah I agree. It’s sometimes good at code smells, though sometimes it can be straight-up wrong in ways that are actually surprising, so it always requires a human in the loop. It’s not good at larger-scale architectural decisions, and I’d also add that it’s usually not capable of understanding the intent behind business logic.
Oh. Well if you’re right, then I just double down. That’s a shitty thing to do. Assuming bad faith tends to be the sign of someone who themselves acts in bad faith. The first comment asked a reasonable question and there was no rational basis on which to assume it was anything other than sincere.
I replied to the other user showing how markdown image descriptions work. Titles are added with hashes.
# title
## subtitle
Text
### sub-sub title
Etc.
Image descriptions are a thing in markdown. Images are inserted into markdown documents with this syntax:
I’m afraid I’m not sure what you mean here. Both markdown and LaTeX are plain text. They’re easily read by a screen reader. Though unless the screen reader is specially-designed for LaTeX support, it may be difficult to comprehend. That’s on the screen reader though, not the document format.
Sure. And 90% of those are writing stuff that would be better off as markdown.
It’s actually a shame, because Windows Phone was actually good. It featured a much more user/task-centric UI, letting users think about what they want to do, rather than which app they need to use to do it. Of course, this was bad for apps’ ability to gain and reinforce brand recognition. So of course they didn’t want to support it.
I’m confused about what point you’re making here. @kbobabob@lemmy.dbzer0.com is asking for recommendations. How do they “take the first step” when they have no idea what’s good? Especially when they’re talking to someone who seems to already know which ones are good, and it’s very easy to ask their knowledgeable opinion.
I think the best system is an operating system that stores the exact date, but exposes it via an API that only returns a boolean. You trust your own local machine, but don’t necessarily trust random apps or websites. And they don’t need to know anything more than whether you pass a particular age gate.
IIRC one of the holidays was meant to be to Florida.
Castle-Nathan-Fillion.gif
Historically, it has ties to the oil industry. It has pivoted more towards green energy recently, but their interests are still in the production of energy, rather than in achieving the best outcomes for our cities.
Most—certainly not all, but most—documents that are written in Microsoft Word, or in LibreOffice Writer, would be better off as either markdown plain text files, or as LaTeX.
CMV.
Yeah it’s insane. I wrote up a complaint in another thread but I think the OP realised how terrible it was because it was deleted by the time I hit submit. That particular post was utter trash, not even attempting to maintain a reasonable tone or look at the situation dispassionately. Its lede literally read:
Dylan, useful idiot with commit access, pushed age verification PRs to systemd, Ubuntu & Arch, got 2 Microslop employees to merge it, called it ‘hilariously pointless’ in the PR itself, then watched Lennart personally block the revert. Unpaid compliance simp.
And frankly, the author of that sort of hit piece should be ashamed of himself. Far, far more than Dylan should.
It’s such a dumb thing to whinge about. Age verification is not a bad thing! What’s bad is age verification that is implemented in a way that either requires, or significantly increases the chances of people’s privacy being violated. Requiring people to upload photo ID directly to sites, or to third-party “trusted age verification partners”. Or trusting bullshit AI face-detection age verification.
Age verification that’s implemented by asking parents to…y’know, actually parent, and helping them to do that by giving them tools like OS-level parental controls, enforced through operating system and browser APIs that we mandate apps and websites use, is the way to go. The OS should expose to apps, and browsers expose to websites, only the simple answer to the question: “is the current user of a legal age to access this content?” as a boolean value, based on information stored in the OS by parents setting it. No fancy technology. No privacy invasion. Just simply giving parents the tools to help them do their job.
There are more complicated technical solutions that could be used. Things involving repeated hashes or blind digital signatures. But these are only appropriate if we pre-suppose that the government needs to strictly enforce it by requiring IDs or other sensitive information be used to age verify. And these solutions help minimise the risk by eliminating the connection between the age verification and which sites are being accessed (so the verifier can’t see what sites the verifyee is viewing, and the sites can’t see who the person being verified was, only that they were verified). And you don’t need to go even that far. Because the best solution is right down on the user’s device, with a simple setting that parents can set.
Is the Fairphone decent?
Couldn’t tell you, because they refuse to sell them in my country. 😡
Wait a 24 hour delay? Damn. I heard a month or so ago that they had planned to back down on the strict sideloading ban, and came into the comments to point that out. But a mandatory 24 hour waiting period (something, if memory serves, America can’t even do to own literal deadly weapons)‽ Geez that’s way worse than I was expecting.
I like the joke, but my pile of clothes is entirely about things that I want to reuse. They’re too dirty to hang back up in the wardrobe, but too clean to throw in the dirty clothes basket. I’m sure there’s an analogy someone could make for this, but Async’s analogy doesn’t work in my case.
Conservatives will do anything to avoid building trains.
Both Lemmy and Piefed support it, though weirdly unlike the alt text field when submitting an image post, this syntax only adds alt text, so only screen readers will see it—users can’t view the text on hover.