divingdragon
One blocks everything; one blocks 6 out of 12; one blocks the other 6 out of 12; one blocks nothing.
||youtube.com/shorts/*$uritransform=/shorts\/(.*)/watch\/\$1/`
in uBlock Origin.(Except that it doesn't work if you click on a short from YouTube's interface - it loads with JavaScript which bypasses the redirection.)
What do you mean? From what I know it was bog-standard microSD(HC/XC) with the maximum supported speed being UHS-I with nothing proprietary.
You are assuming that a train will never have to suddenly stop. This will never fly in the real world. Even if you consider a completely closed railway system with no possibility of external obstructions, there are many kinds of failure that would cause modern trains to apply emergency breaks due to fail-safe designs.
If you remove the bit about not allowing to slam on the breaks, then you just described SelTrac. Even the first version used on the Vancouver SkyTrain (opened in the 80s) is capable of running trains closer than braking distance from what I remember reading. I don't believe it is actually enabled on many SelTrac systems though, because you still need to have safety margins. There is always the possibility that the train in front may decelerate at a rate higher than its emergency braking rate, like if it derailed or collided with external obstructions.
I don't know if it is the case on Windows 11, but I have surely been bitten by CMD batch files using LF line endings. I don't remember the exact issue but it may have been the one bug affecting labels. [1]
[1]: https://www.dostips.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8988#p58888
Every once in a while, navigating with the keyboard in Explorer will cause the window thread to hang up in a busy loop and I have to kill it. I have no idea if this is an Explorer bug or caused by other stuff.
Traditional lineside signals and signs do give enough information to drive a train by a computer, but the rail industry has already chosen decades ago to integrate signalling and automation with the infrastructure, which is a completely different approach than today's self-driving cars. As a result, heavy rail and metro trains will not be "self-driving" in the same way as self-driving cars.
Now, if you say trams that run on streets, then possibly. Trams are often driven by sight and has stronger braking so it is possible to apply the same principles from self-driving cars. In fact, Siemens has been developing and testing one such tram. [1] Though I think the problem space is very similar to self-driving cars. There is no steering, but it still has to handle pedestrians and other road traffic.
[1]: https://www.mobility.siemens.com/global/en/portfolio/rail/ro...
[1]: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/win32/api/htmlhelp/...
We already have this with `ResizeObserver` using the `device-pixel-content-box` option. [1]
[1]: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/ResizeObser...
My first reaction to this is: "What? Cantonese?" I just knew something is wrong.
So I checked the data and immediately see the issue. `yue_Hant_HK` ("Cantonese"), `zh_Hant_HK` (Chinese, Hong Kong) and `zh_Hant_MO` (Chinese, Macau) all uses the same text, while `zh_Hant` (Traditional Chinese) and `zh_Hant_TW` (Chinese, Taiwan) uses a different text.
As it turns out, there is no Cantonese, just plain written Chinese (書面語, written language as we would call it). Both Hong Kong and Taiwan use the Traditional Chinese script, but the two don't exactly use the same vocabularies due to regional differences. For example, the term "privacy" is "私隱" in Hong Kong, but "隱私" in Taiwan. This is why there exists two versions of Traditional Chinese translations of the same text. Since they are likely done by different people (assuming they are not machine translations) they have different translation styles, which contributes to the difference in length of the two paragraphs.
(Also, Cantonese can be written in Simplified Chinese, but that's all I will say regarding this topic.)
Look up Mongolian script and you might change your mind :)
Edit: Ah nevermind, I think I found the relevant report.
Yes, the term "automatic storage" is more accurate here.