My response to the body of this post is https://www.privacyguides.org/en/real-time-communication/
This might address the URL of this post (I’ve never interacted with “iCloud” so I don’t necessarily know what would be a good replacement for it): https://www.privacyguides.org/en/document-collaboration/
Doesn’t git status tell you what to do?
use “git add <file>…” to mark resolution
use “git commit” to conclude merge
I always use git status to check what is appropriate before doing anything else, since the right thing to do can sometimes be different, like after using git rebase when a break command was used vs when a squash command resulted in a conflict.
If you’re coming here and asserting they don’t exist
I don’t think “his “dark team”” doesn’t exist, because people that you are probably referring to are named the news article this discussion is based on.
Were you referring to “The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Government Takeover” using the words “unidentified people”?
I also haven’t found anywhere Elon Musk expressed having a “dark team” (though they might have expressed something similar using different words): https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ftsa&q=“dark+team”+musk&ia=web
Your comments are confusing. Who are you referring to using the words “unidentified people”?
When I use https://archive.is/YAmss#selection-729.0-729.118 I see a list of names of engineers, which is surely a list of “The Young, Inexperienced Engineers Aiding Elon Musk’s Government Takeover”.
I think this is relevant: https://news.cs.washington.edu/2013/08/14/chicken-chicken-chicken-chicken-chicken/
https://www.futrega.org/digger/ clearly provides https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digger_(video_game) using a web browser.
Thank you for prompting me to look for this!
There is more discussion that might be useful here: https://ponder.cat/post/1453581
It seems the specific problem was that military planes were being used instead of civilian planes:
That does make sense to me, since I’d feel less comfortable if a military plane was flying into my country, whereas I’d be more comfortable if a regular civilian flight was used instead. From the perspective of a Colombian, I would be concerned about how national security would be affected by giving permission for military planes to operate when they wouldn’t otherwise have permission.
Something that might be useful is a general strike (see https://sh.itjust.works/post/9745322 and https://sh.itjust.works/post/31602246 also). It would be nice for more people to be unionized in preparation for that. I suspect that it would be better to start unionizing for jobs that more people have (like Personal Care Aides or people working in a retail store or fast food restaurant), since after having a union contract is more normalized it’d probably be easier for people like medical doctors or pilots or lawyers to have a union contract.
I’m personally interested in electoral reform (see !rcv@ponder.cat and !fairvote@lemmy.ca also), such that I wouldn’t have to worry as much about coordinating with other people before I vote. However, it’s guaranteed that someone will always be dissatisfied with the results of an election that isn’t unanimous, so that might not be a complete solution. A more general solution might be to handle more things locally with voluntary organizations. Another option could be to generally devolve power to local institutions (like to a state government or municipality) or to create more independent institutions that are directly accountable to the government of the United States but can act autonomously (like the Federal Reserve System) so that less is dependent on the Congress or the President, and then to reduce the authority of more powerful institutions. If some states withdrew or were expelled from the United States of America that might help (since the power of an expelled state and a post-expulsion United States of America would naturally be more local, and the power of each would also affect less territory).
This seems to be the confusing product: https://www.walmart.ca/en/ip/Kraft-Smooth-Light-Peanut-Butter/10298330?from=%2Fsearch
I’m not sure, but the reasons for being “wobbly” are pretty interesting: https://retrocomputing.stackexchange.com/questions/5019/why-do-3d-models-on-the-playstation-1-wobble-so-much
If I was deigning an emulator, I’d try to match the behavior of the original system as closely as possible, since people designing a program for that system might have depended on any behavior they observed (intentionally or unintentionally), so I’d keep the “wobble” (or provide a way to disable it, but keep it enabled by default).
I can imagine that someone would find a program like this to be useful, and depends on the presently common behavior of zcat, so I expect this is an important part of a system used by a corporation I interact with (and probably many more than I’d expect):
if
zcat ./file.txt.gz >/dev/null
then
process_file ./file.txt.gz
else
printf '%s\n' "There was a decimal exit status of ${?}"
fi
A failure to understand whether something is useful is not a good reason to change it.
Car manufacturers aren’t required to document how to repair “infotainment centers” because they aren’t critical to the operation of a car. Making them more useful might require a car manufacturer to spend more money by allowing more requirements to be imposed upon them.
Whatever the first implementation does ends up being a suicide pact by default.
I agree. The behavior of rm and cat and cp and mv and dd and many other utilities don’t necessarily have the interface I would prefer, but they are too widely used for it to be helpful to radically change them. It’s somewhat unfortunate that these names are already reserved, but I don’t think it’s necessary to change them.
In the same way, I don’t have a problem with packages having generic names but not actually being useful: I’ve read that the requests and urllib3 packages for Python aren’t being maintained very well, but I don’t mind that as long as I can accomplish things while following best practices.
Because of this, I’m not afraid to use names like “getRequest” or “result”, especially if they were generated with an automatic refactoring, and I’m not upset when I see similarly generic names being used with source code I’m changing, since I know that the second name for something that’s similar to an existing thing will have to actually be descriptive, but the first name is likely to not be.
I have another example of how I’d apply these thoughts: the process for developing v2+ modules for the Go programming language strikes me as inelegant, so I would probably prefer to just create an entirely new repository rather than try to attempt that.
What is an example of “plain-text code”, or of someone fainting at the sight of it?
The Java® Language Specification explains that “Programs are written in Unicode”, which can reasonably be described as “Plain Text”, but I would be surprised to see someone fainting at the sight of one.