It doesn't say "only if there's a covered application store present on the system". But maybe everyone in power will interpret this non-logically in exactly the right way that this doesn't become abusive.
I agree, and I feel like this happened more vaguely before but it's coming more acutely into focus now.
E.g. music artists would happily post their music with unattributed cover art. I've seen graphic artists post video slideshows with unattributed music. Authors (books, blog posts) who think cover art or header images are a necessary evil.
I was talking with a lawyer who said that AI legal drafting would never happen because legal work requires high level reasoning and quality is critical, then told me that AI written software would be fine if you just sandbox it.
Edit: I think it's true, there is some amount of slop/coasting in every field, and there's nothing wrong with wanting to avoid that. But people take that too far and decide that everything in (adjacent field) is trivial when actually many fields today are just very complex.
Absolutely, but empirical evidence shows that IoT devices are far and large vulnerable way more often than other types of devices on most networks, because modern smartphones are pretty well secured and many users that are less tech-savvy are abandoning their bloatware-ridden Windows notebooks for Android-based or iOS-based tablets.
In my opinion, this shows a lack of accountability in the industry as a whole over security issues on devices. Ultimately, this won't change unless tight legislation is passed to punish or prevent insecure IoT devices (however you would like to measure that) or unless companies actually start to become accountable for releasing insecure software and hardware, losing out on future sales, which requires a cultural shift in how most people think about appliances and computing as a whole.
What an awful professor! When I first tried to learn pointers, I didn't get it. I tried again 6 months later and suddenly it clicked. The same thing happened for another guy I was learning with.
So the professor just gaslit years of students into thinking they were too dumb to get programming, and also left them with the developmental disability of "if you can't figure something out in a few days, you'll never get it".
I think parent poster was referring to an actual library, i.e. where you would borrow books.
That's also what I thought this was, and came to the comments expecting to see something neat about why libraries might need bespoke operating systems.
Ah right! Yeah, I did think that too..., like locked down so random patrons couldn't do this or that. I was thinking that was quite a pivot for MS though too...
What's wrong with the ribbon? It's basically a tabbed toolbar. Unlike a menu bar it doesn't cover up content or require extra actions to hide, and it doesn't require precise mouse movement in order to avoid accidentally hiding.
Ribbon vs. classic toolbars is the comparison to be made. (Sorry for saying menubar when I meant toolbar up above; that was probably confusing.)
I'll try to explain the gist of it, since that seems to be the question:
As you say, one facet of ribbons is they are essentially tabs. So, ribbons obscure whatever is on "those other tabs". Often, with additional annoyance of taking more space than needed to show what they do show (which often is not want is needed). And any section within a given tab can have its own peculiar (varied) layouts. (Continuing the "find it in the hierarchy - customized for the purpose to make your life easier the way a designer thought would help!" paradigm.)
Contrast with toolbars. Show the ones you need, customize them if wanted. Icons and locations are quite effective for selecting actions. They can all be seen at once. They do what they say. No constantly interpreting the interface flow to find stuff.
Isn't this agreeing with the parent? If Django were the B2B SaaS product, you didn't vibe-code Django, you just used Django. You aren't responsible for maintaining Django itself.
Django wasn’t the product here, though. I used it as part of the toolkit to “slap something together in one weekend”, and that something was the (actual real life) B2B SaaS product, or at least the user facing interface to it.
So I'm curious, if you give them a really detailed specification, will they actually follow it all? If they don't, do you have any recourse? Are these small shops/fronts that are constantly coming/going like Amazon sellers, or do they have reputations?
Design-wise, I think having users modify service on/off state *and* systemd itself modify those states is a terrible design, which leads to stuff turning back on when you turn it off, or things turning off despite you wanting them on, etc. (also mentioned higher up)
FWIW after making puteron I found dinit https://github.com/davmac314/dinit which has a very similar design, so presumably they hit similar issues.
Systemd usually only modifies the state if is somehow configured to do so. Socket activations, timers, depwndencies. They all tell systemd what to do and can usually be modified if needed.
reply