The sorites paradox says that removing a grain of sand from a heap doesn't stop it from being a heap, and yet we can do that until we are left with a single grain of sand which is clearly not a heap.
Likewise, taking elements from many influences and combining them involves a lot of creative choices about which pieces to take from which influence while copying one thing exactly involves no creative choices and is just reusing someone else's effort. It's the difference between baking someone a cake or getting one from the store.
The combination of straightforward explanations and clear diagrams reminds me of David Macaulay's The Way Things Work which is one of my favorite books.
Oh, no, I'm with you. The fewer connector types we have to use, the better. My comment was meant as an FYI for you or anyone else who wasn't aware and not as a dismissal of your valid criticism.
For what it's worth there are third-party rp2350 boards with USB-C connectors if that's important to you. Heck, WaveShare has one with two USB-C connectors: https://www.waveshare.com/rp2350-usb-c.htm
This kind of analysis sounds far more interesting than a lot of the "just do what I did!" startup writing that's out there. Do you have any recommendations for further reading from this perspective?
I think some small adjustments could reduce friction to new users. Let people scan and read comments anonymously, group similar product discussions together until volume increases, and look up UPCs instead of asking people to enter what they just scanned.
Sure, as something parents opt into and where the local OS is the place where age and content rating are compared it could be a useful parenting tool. As something that lets big social media companies shift responsibility onto everyone else and opens the door for more user tracking and targeted advertising, it's not doing me or my kids any favors.
An update to the Logitech software last year added a fast way to access some kind of Logitech AI, but made it so the combination of mouse and dongle I was using no longer worked together. It was kind of a parable for the whole industry lately.
>SBCL derives most of its code from CMU CL, created at Carnegie Mellon University. Radical changes have been made to some parts of the system (particularly bootstrapping) but many fundamentals (like the mapping of Lisp abstractions onto the underlying hardware, the basic architecture of the compiler, and much of the runtime support code) are only slightly changed. Enough changes have been made to the interface and architecture that calling the new system CMU Common Lisp would cause confusion - the world does not need multiple incompatible systems named CMU CL. But it's appropriate to acknowledge the descent from the CMU hackers (and post-CMU CMU CL hackers) who did most of the heavy lifting to make the system work. So the system is named Steel Bank after the industries where Andrew Carnegie and Andrew Mellon, respectively, made the big bucks.
No, I'm not saying "it's obviously a father and a son", I'm saying "it's not obviously sexual or gay and it's weird that you were so concerned about that interpretation that you were embarrassed about it". I didn't immediately know it was his son and represented innocence. I did immediately know that it was probably not something sexual, and I went looking for an answer instead of panicking about anyone seeing me looking at it.
For a guy who complains about reddit so much, you sure seem intent on having a deliberately obtuse reddit-style "gotcha" argument. I'm not really here for that. I hope you remain safe from phone images that scandalize you and those around you.
I wasn't told how to interpret it, I saw an unusual picture and, where you apparently jumped the conclusion that it was two men that were obviously about to have sex and that it would be a scandalous statement on your own sexuality if anyone were to see you with that picture, I chose to look up what the explanation was. I can only imagine how much you must clutch your pearls when naval aviators play volleyball together in the movies.
>when attempts were made to push through security-enhancing changes to the Web PKI, CAs would push back on the grounds that there'd be collateral damage to non-Web-PKI use cases
Do you (or anyone else) have an example of this happening?
https://scrollpods.app/