tsegers

I still vividly remember a peer watching me carefully record a vim macro, thinking I was just editing. Right as he said "Why are you so slow?!?", I ran `100@q` to apply the edit to the whole file. Just "oh." after that.

> You can buy

No, you cannot. You can license them temporarily.

The housings are not sealed. At least not on the older Aura H2O models. That model's water proofing achieved by a coating on the PCB. I googled this in a panic when a significant amount of water came flowing from the USB port as I removed it from the bath.

I believe that the top-level comment you replied to is making the point that there should not be any authority that either allows or disallows what a user can do with the device they own. Purchasing a device should make one that authority, free to decide how much security to trade for how much privilege.

I still use it regularly in 2024 to load data onto embedded devices running U-Boot. It saves me a network cable if one is not otherwise required.

As another paying user of Kagi I wonder what prevented you from using another search engine for the six hours that Kagi was unavailable. Search engines are not like your email provider or ISP in that you're locked in.

Here's what I cobbled together for Arduino [1]. It ain't pretty, but it's short and it works.

[1] https://paste.sr.ht/~tsegers/53adaecd734e7159352f152ac1dcc85...

I'd argue @ is more suitable for a dereference operation than an "address of" one. It functions that way in an email address too.

Would you say that the Linux kernel is written by mostly "100% subpar C programmers"? Because it's an extremely common pattern to have multiple goto labels at the end of a function.

How are they possibly not the victims after the distributor orders a vast quantity of product, goes MIA for months, and then proceeds to go "whoops, just kidding, here's your stale product back"?

Whats the actual difference between sending ten identical low-effort auto-generated emails and ten unique low-effort auto-generated emails?

> So FreeSoftware/OSS people don't work hard?

That's not a fair conclusion from the parent comment at all. Software developers _do_ have the right to prevent their work from being given away for free. Them _choosing_ to develop FOSS is them voluntarily waiving that right.

Sourcehut's tutorial on send-email is pretty good: https://git-send-email.io/

Using software in accordance with the terms of its licence is not shameful.

That's exactly what a lot of users that do development on a beefy remote machine from a light machine they use as a terminal want. Ssh+vim+tmux is a pretty common setup. That network request might add 20ms of lag, but means that anything that requires CPU power will be an order of magnitude faster. The unhappy path (a bad or absent connection) is bad, but the happy path is pretty damn happy.

The Uno has a _giant_ ecosystem behind it going back over a decade and it's more than enough for most beginner mcu projects. That's the appeal. Other than that, it's a pretty weak chip.

Compiling their example with the Arduino toolchain seems to fill up about 90% of an Uno's 32k flash space. I think that rules it out as usable on anything that doesn't have a larger amount than that.

And neither would you see headlines about a human child learning to read, yet if a monkey were to do the same it'd be up here in no time. The noteworthy thing here is not the activity performed, but what entity the activity was performed by.

If someone claims that not a single actor failed to deliver it's a perfectly valid response to use the worst actor as a example to the contrary.

Using basic statistical methods to determine effective policies can result in policies that a lot of people would consider unfair and unethical.

I think that the linked article described that messages that arrive out of order can still be decrypted despite the decryption keys being generated in a strict order. As far as I know, the order of the keys that are used to decrypt incoming messages also indicate the order in which the decrypted messages were sent.

> Why would anybody need this?

Because they have no experience using a terminal, entering commands and finding documentation

> and much of the software you will no doubt use to create your premium software was made with this philosophy.

Even the FSF considers selling software a good thing [1]

[1] https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html

While that is true, ranges and intervals are not native constructs in quite a few languages.

The -1 with 0-based indexing occurs very frequently when using the amount of elements in some collection to derive boundaries of the indexes, which will range from 0 up to and including n-1. Grepping for "- 1" in my code folder returns mostly expressions that look like 'length/len/size - 1'.

No, it works. It's just non-obvious that it does due to the reliance on 4 levels of braces.

It is equivalent to the following:

    lhs.Major < rhs.Major
    or (lhs.Major == rhs.Major and lhs.Minor < rhs.Minor)
    or (lhs.Major == rhs.Major and lhs.Minor == rhs.Minor and lhs.Patch <= rhs.Patch)

Deduplicating (lhs.Major == rhs.Major) decreased readability enough to be confusing.

That's still one action more than is required for using a synchronization service. The killer feature is not having to do anything at all. I save my file on one computer, and it's available on all my other machines, my phone and anything with a web browser without a conscious thought at all.

I'm not quite sure if that's a silver lining, as it's usage in such a way might do to the word "programmer" what it did to the word "hacker", namely turn an innocent word into one with connotations people would rather not associate themselves with.