They’re asking for TV manufacturers to block a VPN app in the TV. Not to block VPN in general.

Dude, if you’re being obtuse on purpose because you have an ax to grind against Rust, try a different approach. You’re not getting anywhere, clearly by the fact that no one agrees with you.

If you don’t like that Rust has a restricted trademark, then call that out instead of trying to label the software and it’s license as non-free. It’s literally called out in my source that name restrictions ipso facto does not violate freedom 3.

But if you genuinely believe that the implementation of the Rust language and it’s trademark is burdensome to create a fork, and you want people to believe you, then you gotta bring receipts. Remember, the benchmark that we both quoted is that it “effectively hampers you from releasing your changes”. It being “not a piece of cake” doesn’t cut it.

Hint: Google Rust forks since their existence also undermines your claim.

Good luck.

Please read this and try again.

https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.en.html#packaging

Rules about how to package a modified version are acceptable, if they don’t substantively limit your freedom to release modified versions, or your freedom to make and use modified versions privately. Thus, it is acceptable for the license to require that you change the name of the modified version, remove a logo, or identify your modifications as yours. As long as these requirements are not so burdensome that they effectively hamper you from releasing your changes, they are acceptable; you’re already making other changes to the program, so you won’t have trouble making a few more.

If you are being intentional about its use, then you can get a lot out of it. But for some, maybe even most, YouTube is a distraction.

Yes it can be an issue because the GPS doesn’t know where you are and thinks you are on an aboveground street. Freeway tunnels can have multiple exits too.

I disagree. I think the default option should be what users expect, and users expect “copy” to do exactly that: copy without modifying the text.

Just because you can get part of your education remotely or through self-learning didn’t mean “anything can be learned online”.

And if you were hiring a math tutor for your kid, would you prefer a self-proclaimed expert from watching YouTube videos or would you want someone who got a degree from a credentialed university? And even if you don’t care, why are you surprised that others would be skeptical of the YouTube expert?

Remote learning can be fine for some things, and self learning through informal channels are also fine, but it’s not a full on replacement for formal education in all cases.

No sorry, that’s just fundamentally false. You can’t just learn titration techniques from watching a video. You can’t learn phlebotomy without an instructor watching you do it to a patient. Hell, you aren’t learning how to drive a car from playing a video game.

And I’m not sure where you are pulling the “if you are that powerful” from. You really have an ax to grind don’t you.

Ah yes, I’m sure the formal training received by doctors, nurses, lawyers, teachers, and engineers is just an over-hyped “education” that can all be replaced by online MOOCs.

There are real problems with education, especially with the costs, but “anything can be learned online” is the worst take I’ve heard in a long while.

I feel the opposite. We should have mandatory voting for all federal general elections. Treat it like jury duty or taxes - voting is a civic duty. You should be compelled to cast a ballot even if you leave it blank because you have no preference.

Of course, this can only workwith automatic voter registration and 100% mail-in ballots.

I’m shocked.

This doesn’t help for Gmail. I moved to a different part of the country and I have a spam email account that isn’t connected to a phone or second email. Even with the right password, it wouldn’t let me log in because I was trying to sign in from a different location and no secondary way to authenticate.

Luckily it was a spam email so it was just annoying to recreate some accounts I used for that email, but yeah ve warned.

"I can read this Perl scrip"t should translate to “I’m lying”.

Yeah that’s a good point. It’s telling that inheritance is by design difficult to change unless you follow very specific rules of good OO design patterns.

I guess it’s easy to write bad code in any programming paradkgm but inheritance makes it easy to screw up.

Most of us have bad memories of over-complex hierarchies we regret seeing, but this is probably due to the dominance of OOP in recent decades.

This sentence here is why inheritance gets a bad reputation, rightly or wrongly. Inheritance sounds intuitive when you’re inheriting Vehicle in your Bicycle class, but it falls apart when dealing with more abstract ideas. Thus, it’s not immediately clear when and why you should use inheritance, and it soon becomes a tangled mess.

Thus, OO programs can easily fall into a trap of organizing code into false hierarchies. And those hierarchies may not make sense from developer to developer who is reading the code.

I’m not a fan of OO programming, but I do think it can occasionally be a useful tool.

If the work I’m doing is on a feature branch on remote or locally, why does it matter to the rest of the team? My integration steps can be done on a server instead of locally. TBD forces teams to collaborate synchronously since changes are pushed straight to trunk. Rebase or squashes are irrelevant here.

Another poster put it great: TBD is trying to solve a culture problem. Feature branches and pull requests into main is much more flexible. The only time TBD make sense is for small teams - like 2 or maybe 3. And even at 2, I’d much rather create feature branches that merge into main.

Precisely. In practice, trunk based development just means your branch is local instead of on remote.

Ehhh, I don’t quite agree with this. I’ve done the same thing where I used a timestamp field to replace a boolean. However, they are technically not the same thing. In databases, boolean fields can be nullable so you actually have 3-valued boolean logic: true, false, and null. You can technically only replace a non-nullable field to a timestamp column because you are treating null in timestamp as false.

Two examples:

1. A table of generated documents for employees to sign. There’s a field where they need to agree to something, but it’s optional. You want to differentiate between employees who agreed, employees who disagreed, and employees who have yet to agree. You can’t change the column from is_agreed to agreed_at.

2. Adding a boolean column to an existing table. These columns need to either default to an value (which is fair) or be nullable.

I think it’s good advice to keep your options open and look around to see if there’s any good opportunities every year. It’s good to keep your ear to the ground, even if it’s just networking or browsing through openings and talking to recruiters. But no, you don’t have to change jobs every X number of years.

It’s not about what it is today but what it can be. I agree that there are a bunch of problems, but the future does look bright.