https://www.gnu.org/software/tramp/#Ad_002dhoc-multi_002dhop...
4,053 karma · joined August 1, 2014
https://www.gnu.org/software/tramp/#Ad_002dhoc-multi_002dhop...
The relevant rule is "Use Reliable Sources" and the subreddit seems focused on facts and statistics. I think it makes sense to default to disallowing random websites not reviewed by the source they've chosen for bias review.
Can you explain how? To me it seems like the most clunky option that largely became big because people used its name in place of the concept. Some adoption is for latency benefits, but it's not like it's great at that either.
- It desperately wants me not to use the web app
- The desktop app opens a bunch of separate windows, largely without much of a purpose
- The desktop app for some reason requires audio to be enabled separately
- Only the host can share their screen by default
- The "leave meeting" button seems to confuse many people due to its weird one-button submenu
By contrast basically every alternative is just a single click to join, doesn't require extra permissions for core functionality, joins audio by default and just leaves the meeting when you press the button for it.
I was similarly confused by the article's lack of actual information. As it stands it tells me there are arbitrary CPU specs and a bunch of common hardware meets those requirements. But then apparently the situation is terrible, people will need to buy new hardware and the majority of consumer hardware is deprecated.
Then near the end they introduce their central gateway to this decentralized web, and tell us that another similar gateway is merging into theirs.
I'm not against introducing more options for decentralization into browsers, but I don't think you're going to do that by making it unnecessary through central gateways.
Many forms of insurance include a cap to reduce the insurer's risk, but that doesn't mean such a cap is necessary for it to be called insurance. The height of the premium can be defined by law, but it's still an insurance premium.
Pensions can be hard to understand because longevity risk is a bit counterintuitive, but depending on how they work in your country they can definitely be a form of insurance.
The one you can review is a different game. The store page for Metro Exodus describes the Enhanced Edition as:
> a stunning visual upgrade that REQUIRES a Ray-Tracing Capable GPU as part of the minimum spec.
Things like that can introduce all kinds of new problems and glitches, so reviews for one version don't necessarily apply to the other.
Then your first point is:
> No more context-switching
> Pull requests will create an ephemeral Slack Channel where all the work will be done and imported from Github. Stop wasting time jumping from Github to Slack.
But the video next to it shows... constant context-switching/jumping between Slack and GitHub.
For everything one has to say about a PR this introduces a choice between a GitHub comment and a Slack message, where comments on GitHub get mirrored to Slack but not (directly) vice-versa. Why not just keep the conversation on GitHub?
Do comments seem too "formal"? Are GitHub's notifications not targeted enough? Those seem like possible problems, but is splitting the conversation space really part of the solution?
> What might throw people off is that it is functional
None of the languages you list are functional, so that could still explain it.
I remember in university having trouble reaching several (admittedly niche) services, including some of my own, because they only allowed traffic to very specific ports like 80 and 443. I couldn't connect through SSH to my own servers because I applied the best practice of not having SSH run on port 22.
I ended up researching eduroam policies (which suggest as little blocking as possible) and arguing with IT about it for a few weeks, but the end result was just a few extra unblocked ports for protocols I could convince them to allow. So I moved all my own stuff to those ports, ignoring the protocols.
Say I'm looking for a bike. Person A is selling one I like and promises to deliver after two weeks. Person B is selling one I like a bit less, but promises to deliver after one week. I might now choose to buy from person B, even if I like the bike a bit less.
If I buy from person B and they deliver after three weeks, there's a problem. Why did it take three times as long? Did they ever intend to deliver after one week? Should they have known they wouldn't be able deliver after one week? They got the order based on a feature they didn't deliver. If that was intentional, that's fraud.
Unfortunately it's not yet in Clisp. I submitted a merge request[1] a year ago, but it's been silent since then.
There are different styles available. While blaming a file, press B to open the popup, then c to cycle through them.
> I tried to find the equivalent of "git add --patch", but did not find it in the info manual.
That's just the entire staging workflow. You see a list of changed files, which you can stage per file. Or you can expand a file to its changed chunks using TAB, then stage chunk by chunk. Or you can select some lines in the chunk and stage only those.
Apple doesn't provide payment processing, customer service or anything on payments made using other payment methods, so there's nothing to invoice developers for. They also already charge developers a yearly fee for a developer account.
Am I misunderstanding the argument, does the article misrepresent it, or does it just not make sense?
I don't think runit has an equivalent for `systemd-analyze blame`, but something is probably slowing things down by a lot.
I'm not fully convinced by the wordmark (might be a tad too playful) and the "blurple" (feels a bit weird on a dark background), but overall the changes make sense and don't remove/deny any positive attributes of the brand.
I hope latency has improved to be much better. Haven't tried it in a few years.
Note that, in Firefox, you can always get to the context menu using shift-right click.