Possibly? Or maybe people will think twice about deadnaming you.
Possibly? Or maybe people will think twice about deadnaming you.
I mean, maybe if you bake a stone cold potato that was in the fridge and then cook it for two hours? But even then we’re probably talking about a handful of minutes at the most.
Which
car companybar did you say you work for?
A major one.
Just automatically started uploading everything on my hard drive to an account I didn’t set up
Wait, what?
Real question here: has anyone else had luck side-stepping the Live365 signup during/after install? I’ve done this, and I’m very confused that more people haven’t.
I totally get that: use the right tools and you’ll be okay. This applies to many technologies in this space.
With respect, I still take this advice like hearing “look out for rattlesnakes if you’re hiking there.” It might be safer to just hike where there are no rattlesnakes, instead.
I swear, overcoming fixed functional-ness is like a superpower when you can apply it.
I once shared a small office with a co-worker. I had the idea to move the desks away from the walls and place them back-to-back, diagonally, in the middle of the room. Other co-workers scoffed and remarked at how dumb and unconventional this looked. Then I explained that we each now had nearly full privacy from each other, much more personal space in our respective corners, no more glare from the window, and nobody could sneak up on us from the door anymore. Things got pretty quiet after that.
Useful? Not exactly. But you’d never look lazy or idle, that’s for sure.
/me goes back to get second folding chair.
Pascal went to military school.
I’m not in love with the idea, but a language that cuts out the BS has a sudden appeal when on a group/team project.
I take this as less of a “I can’t use this intuitive feature reliably” thing and more of a “the truth table will bite you in the ass when you least expect it and/or make a mistake” thing.
That depends.
39 and under crowd - “Wanna go again?”
40 and over crowd - “I’m going to need at least that many breaks.”
It also doesn’t hurt that Anjelica is always illuminated like she’s from another movie altogether (credit to CinemaTherapy). The director turned the glamor factor up to 11 in every scene without breaking anything. It’s impossible to follow that.
Raul, somehow, manages to be a complete ham yet relatable, lovable, and most importantly, believable.
I really want to believe this was the only heated part of the power transfer.
Better than bacon. And I know those are fighting words in some places. Just embrace the schmaltz and let it drip into the rice.
The key is to get to that skin while it’s still hot, but before it winds up in the fridge. You can reconstitute it in a skillet, like bacon, but it’s just not the same.
Just for you, what is easily the best cover of this theme.
Is that MIT (munch it today) or GPL (generally pleasing w/lettuce) licensed?
I’ve been in situations where I wanted to retain credit/ownership of ideas and code, but wanted to be able to use them in the workplace. So building a MIT/BSD licensed library on the weekend and then importing it on Monday was the only game in town. I get the portfolio piece and my job is easier as a result. But I stick to non-novel and non-patentable stuff - “small” work really, as Stallman is quoted here..
In some work environments, GPL or “GPL with an exception” would never get the kind of traction it should. Lots of places I’ve worked lack the legal and logistical framework for wrangling licenses and exceptions. It’s hard to handle such cases if there’s literally nobody to talk to about it, while you have automated systems that flag GPL license landmines anyway. The framing is a kind of security problem, not a license problem, so you never really get to start.
The two licenses have distinct use cases, and only overlap for some definitions of “free” software. I also think both the comic artist and OP set up a fallacious argument. I’ll add that in no way do I support Intel’s shenanigans here.
The comic author takes one specific case of an MIT licensed product being used in a commercial product, and pits it against another GPL product. This ignores situations where MIT is the right answer, where GPL is the wrong one, situations where legal action on GPL violations has failed, and all cases where the author’s intent is considered (Tanenbaum doesn’t mind). From that I conclude that this falls under The Cherry Picking Fallacy. While humorous, it’s a really bad argument.
But don’t take it from me, learn from the master of logic himself.
commonly referred to as “cuck licenses”
This sentiment makes the enclosing sentence an Ad-hominem fallacy, by attacking the would-be MIT license party as having poor morals and/or low social standing. Permissive licenses absolutely do allow others to modify code without limit, but that is suggested to be a bad thing on moral grounds alone. That said, I’d love to see a citation here because that’s the first I’ve heard of this pejorative used to describe software licensing.
You’re not alone. I recall getting sniped from every direction at some points, with very tough 1:1 battles and boss battles that just kinda “happen” out in the open.