Well, I assume they had other concerns, too. For example, it adds a bunch of complexity for reformatting a JSON from single-line to pretty-print, if comments can appear in there. I’m certainly not saying that I’m always best friends with the decision to remove comments, just that I can somewhat understand it.

They’re not supposed to contain data, but some parsers will allow you to access what’s written into comments. And so, of course, someone made use of that and I had to extract what was encoded basically like that:

<!--
    Host: toaster,
    Location: moon,
-->
<data>Actual XML follows...</data>

My best guess is that they added this data into comments rather than child nodes or attributes, because they were worried some of the programs using this XML would not be able to handle an extension of the format.

I can kind of understand it after having to work with an XML file where users encoded data into comments for no good reason. But yeah, it does make JSON awkward for lots of potential use-cases.

I don’t feel like it will stray very far from what’s dubbed “TOML 0.1” in the meme. Yes, it has inline tables and as of TOML 1.1, they’re allowed to span multiple lines, so it’s technically not anymore illegal to do what’s in the meme. But all things considered, this is still a miniscule change compared to TOML 1.0.

Well, Wikipedia does say:

The [TOML] project standardizes the implementation of the ubiquitous INI file format (which it has largely supplanted[citation needed]), removing ambiguity from its interpretation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TOML

One thing that will become important pretty quick if you continue making these scripts is that it’s almost always better to wrap your variables in quotes - so it becomes yt-dlp -x “$a”.

Oh man, this reminds me of the joke that any program that’s more complex than Hello World has bugs – and folks still don’t even agree how to spell “Hello, World!”.

Of course, Bash is a particular minefield in this regard…

Man, I really hate how much they waffle. The only valid response is “You have to drive, because you need your car at the car wash in order to wash it”.

I don’t need an explanation what kind of problem it is, nor a breakdown of the options. I don’t need a bulletpoint list of arguments. I don’t need pros and cons. And I definitely don’t need a verdict.

Firefox Sync is end-to-end-encrypted. Mozilla cannot see your synced data.

Either way, I have no idea how this is supposed to happen without you entering your credentials into Firefox at some point. Even if Mozilla wanted to be sus, they couldn’t just guess which account is yours.

Are you using Firefox Sync with the same e-mail address? I believe, that all gets put into the same account system.

It’s the R programming language, typically used in statistics: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_(programming_language)

To be honest, what I’m most mad about isn’t the typoes, it’s that someone generated this image and figured, yeah alright, that will clear things up.

On some level you want to believe that even if someone does not come up with a proper concept for a visualization, that they still check what the AI shat out, so that it’s at the very least not conceptually wrong and not confusing.

This image isn’t just shitty, it’s actively worse than having no visualization. They could’ve generated that, chuckled, and not used it. Just how do you blunder your perception check so badly that you decide to include it anyways?

Wow, it stole it badly enough that it might not count as copyright infringement in court, but it also stole it badly enough that it isn’t useful at all.

I admire your ability to interpret anything into this fucking picture…

Yeah, I’ve done that occasionally, too, but it adds a load of friction for moving windows between screens, in particular also when un-/replugging the screen, so it’s still painful enough that I don’t bother with a second screen.

I guess, it also plays a role that I do use lots of workspaces, so it’s 1) extra painful and 2) I don’t have as big of a need for a second screen, since I can just switch out what first screen displays very quickly.

Oh boy, feature freeze for Ubuntu 26.04 is on Thursday. Hopefully, they still include this update.

My work laptop unfortunately comes with Kubuntu LTS and I desperately want the virtual-desktops-only-on-the-primary-screen feature on there. Currently, I’m the guy that actively disables all but one screen, because my workflow does not work at all with the secondary screen switching in sync with the primary screen.

I still wouldn’t assume it to actually go further than that. It’s a limitation of the EWMH standard, which is used for controlling the placement of windows.

I don’t have in-depth knowledge of the standard, but I assume, it can only represent 1 desktop as the active desktop and stuff like that.
Maybe you could try to be clever by e.g. always reporting the active desktop of the active screen and stuff like that, but yeah, no idea if you can do that for all aspects of the standard, and whether applications will still behave as expected.

It’s mentioned as the second point in “But that’s not all…”:

An optional new login manager for Plasma

Are you thinking of the volume icon in the systray? For that, it’s pretty standard that scrolling changes the volume, yeah. @muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works is talking about the volume of each individual application, though:

(I have hardly used Windows for the past decade, so no idea, if it has it.)

The problem is that all of this happened outside the law. Calling it a “DMCA takedown” is misleading, because it’s not making use of the DMCA’s mechanisms. There actually are hefty penalties for false DMCA claims, but only if you file them with a court.

I assume, Valve may be liable as well, for distributing copyrighted material (especially after they’ve been notified of it). At the very least, YouTube also has a system like that, where they allow claimants to bully creators with no repercussions.
Basically, Valve, YouTube et al need their own copyright takedown system to be preferrable for companies, so that those use it instead of filing an official DMCA claim.

Of course, the root cause of the problem is still the DMCA.

I’m open for counterarguments, but I always felt this was a silly way of looking at things. You cannot measure stuff at the quantum level without significantly altering what you measured. (You can never measure without altering what you measured, since we typically blast stuff with photons from a light source to be able to look at it, but for stuff that’s significantly larger than photons, the photons are rather insignificant.)

As such, you can look at measuring quanta in two ways:

1. Either the quantum had the state that you end up measuring all along. It is only “undetermined”, because strictly nothing can measure it before you do that first measurement.
2. Or you can declare it to have some magical “superposition”, from which it jumps into an actual state in the instant that you do the measurement.

Well, and isn’t quantum entanglement evidence for 1.? You entangle these quanta, then you measure one of them. At this point, you already know what the other one will give as a result for its measurement, even though you have not measured/altered it yet.
You can do the measurement quite a bit later and still get the result that you deduced from measuring the entangled quantum. (So long as nothing else altered the property you want to measure, of course…)