‘Toy’ feels strange to me here. It’s more of a just-works vs power-tool distinction. Sometimes people like tools that require you to RTFM because the deeper understanding has concrete benefits; it’s not just fun. User-friendliness is not all upside, it is still a tradeoff.
You’re absolutely right about hurting new users by not making the destinction, whatever label is used.
This is one of the little things I love about Gentoo. It’s rolling, but not bleeding edge.
Plus, you can opt into bleeding edge either per package or for all packages. It’s honestly a flexibility that doesn’t even require a source-based distro, so Arch could do it too.
That’s just one thing the editing language does, though. There’s no single feature you can point to as the smoking gun; it’s all the small advantages added together that make vi worthwhile.
Not just the next parenthesis that appears, It jumps to the matching one that opens or closes the one under the cursor. Hitting it repeatedly bounces back and forth around the text that pair of parentheses enclose.
It works not only with brackets and curly braces, but also with opening and closing tags in XML etc.
I feel like other editors must have an equivalent feature, though. I’d say the fact that vi can put such a specific action under just rather than some nasty chord or mouse operation is what really makes it shine here.
Nano is extremely basic, it’s not really the right comparison. Vi competes well with heavyweight GUI editors and IDEs, yet is available about as ubiquitously as nano.
By learning vi, I can have my no-compromises favorite editor equally available to me locally or remotely. The terse, low-chord (looking at you, nano) editing language in vi means I’m not even that hampered when I do remote editing from my phone.
This is the exact hole that had me quit Gentoo so many times over the years. When I stopped trying to be cool and just set my system up with KDE it finally stuck and I’ve been happily using it ever since.
Once you’re past setup and understand package management, what is a distro but a desktop environment, after all?
And the whole human body, brain and all, can run on ~100 watts. Truly astounding.
There’s no mention of anything like zero-days in that article. They only mention that it can target all major OSes, with no mention of cutting edge versions also being vulnerable.
Hilariously, the article directly supports my position as well:
The good news for some, at least: it likely poses a minimal threat to most people, considering the multi-million-dollar price tag and other requirements for developing a surveillance campaign using Sherlock
That’s a big part of my whole point. People who don’t do even a modicum of actual thought about a practical threat model for themselves love pretending that ad blocking isn’t primarily just about not wanting to see ads.
If Israel or some other highly capable attacker is coming after you, then fine, you really do need ad blocking. In that case malware in ads is going to be the least of your concerns.
Attacks that cast such a wide net as to be the concern of all web users are necessarily less dangerous because exploits need to be kept secret to avoid being patched.
There’s nothing wrong with taking extra precautions; I’m certainly not saying blocking ads is a bad idea. It’s the apparent confusion that an informed, tech-savvy person might choose not to block ads that makes me laugh.
Huh? The point of this discussion is that I don’t need to block them to keep myself safe in sketchy corners of the web.
You say with such confidence. Is it so hard to imagine people can defend themselves with means other than ad blocking?
Drive-by malware tends not to be zero-days though. I’ve stayed safe for decades just by keeping my software up to date.
Of course; I’m just a lot more worried about the systemic problems of mass surveillance than any practical risk to me individially.
The way people talk about people who don’t block ads is so funny.
I understand and respect the reasons people choose to use blockers, but ads honestly just aren’t that problematic for me in practice and are easy to avoid and ignore.
Nope and yep. It’s an incredible tool, but it’s got a vim-sized learning curve to really leverage it plus other significant drawbacks. Still my beloved one-and-only when I can get away with it, but its a bit of a masochistic acquired taste for sure.
Template tweaking, as I imagine academia heavily relies on, is really the closest to practical it gets. You do still get beautiful results, it’s just hard to express yourself arbitrarily without really committing to the bit.
Who’s barring cannabis users? Red Cross at least only has a problem if your decision-making appears impaired. They don’t even ask you to wait between smoking and donating as long as you’re thinking clearly enough.
As in the gore makes more sense in a game than a show, not that the games lack gore.
Holy shit I think I have the same problem, mesh network and all. I assumed it was a driver issue; thanks for the pointer!
Don’t give Java the credit of inventing bytecode, it’s a much cooler concept than that
Bad code, yes, calling it ‘shit’, no.
Stuff like this is a big part of why software circles are seen as so hostile and unwelcoming to outsiders.
You can be completely clear and frank without resorting to insult, mild though it may be. Just because you and people most like you understand that calling their work ‘shit’ doesn’t reflect on them personally, doesn’t mean it’s not significantly exclusionary.
Now, obviously you can get to know your reports well enough to understand whom would take ‘shit’ well, but that doesn’t mean it’s not generally important to temper criticism with kindness. Kindness never has to mean holding back criticism, just avoiding stooping to insult.
If you’ve got a complex and potentially nested object, what does the body of this simple function look like? That’s what they mean.