> The project is Apache licensed, so even if they took it, outside of lacking attribution / retaining copyright, I don't see a problem? They would be require to add it to an "About" tab or something.
They used it without having a license. The apache license would have allowed them to use it, but they didn’t meet the conditions.
This sounds equivalent to using paid software without paying to me.
The original author could well claim that “the cost of a license under the terms which they used it is $2M”. After all, the cost of software licenses is entirely arbitrary and set by the author (copyright owner).
> any analysis built on month-to-month changes […] should be taken with a very large grain of salt
Agreed.
January and February are school vacations in South America. The whole month. Kids have a lot more free hours to tinker and play video games. That might not be the cause of the spike in this particular case, but there's probably dozens of similar random facts that can affect statistics on any month in unexpected ways.
I know that after a phone has been stolen, attackers want to gain access to an Apple account to remove the activation lock. But in this case, no devices had been stolen yet. The most they could do would be to… remotely mark the devices as stolen? Then ask the victim to pay to unlock them?
short term memory, but I'll admit it isn't perfect and sometimes I'm pretty sure that I might be double labelling. But that's okay because even an occasional mistaken double label is still a partially valid signal that the box is being used a lot.
A matter of taste: when I use wine on Linux I prefer to confine all window to a single "real" window. In truth: I suspect that your suggestions is more work to pull off properly.
Anyone with an older toolchain is free to fork it on github, test with the older version, and CI to the project that tests with the older version, and submit a patch, too!
This may not get the project as many users, but not everyone who writes a 50 line project is trying to figure out which versions it supports and setting up full test matrices either.
Not a Go dev, but I typically set up a CI with the oldest toolchains I support (usually a debian release), and only bump those versions when I really need something from the latest versions. Locally I build with the most recent tools. This ensures good enough coverage for very little work, as I notice when I start using something that's newer and can bump the toolchain accordingly.
Sure, but if you start a new small project and throw it on GitHub, it's not totally insane to just put the version you tested. Just because someone put up their tiny library doesn't mean they've put in the effort to figure out which version they need.
I find that (neo)vim enable code navigation to be much faster than any GUI as well, once past the learning curve. If you’re going to work with code long term (eg: years), the learning curve pays off quickly.
Intuitively, I’ve always had an impression that using an analogue circuit would be feasible for neural networks (they just matrix multiplication!). These should provide instantaneous output.
Isn’t this kind of approach feasible for something so purpose-built?
With the amount of bullshit animations all OSes come with these days, enabled by default, and most applications being webapp with their own secondary layer of animations, and with the typical developer's near-zero familiarity with how floating point numbers behave, I imagine there's nearly always some animation somewhere, almost but not quite eased to a stop, that's making subtle color changes across some chunk of the screen - not enough to notice, enough to change some pixel values several times per second.
I wonder what existing mitigations are at play to prevent redisplay churn? It probably wouldn't matter on Windows today, but will matter with those low-refresh-rate screens.
Android has a debug tool that flashes colors when any composed layer changes. It's probably an easy optimization for them to not re-render when nothing changes.
I never thought about it but you've made me realise that a lot of people in our industry have been so enthusiastically working on random "creative" things that at best no one even asked for and it turns out to hurt the end users in ways no one even knows.
I used to be a front end dev and I always hated that animation was coded per element. There should be just a global graphics API that does all the morphing and magic moves that user can turn off on the OS.
Normally, your posts are very coherent, but this one flies on the rails. (Half joking: Did someone hack your account!?) I don't understand your rant here:
> With the amount of bullshit animations all OSes come with these days, enabled by default, and most applications being webapp with their own secondary layer of animations, and with the typical developer's near-zero familiarity with how floating point numbers behave
I use KDE/GNU/Linux, and I don't see a lot of unnecessary animations. Even at work where I use Win11, it seems fine. "[M]ost applications being webapp": This is a pretty wild claim. Again, I don't think any apps that I use on Linux are webapps, and most at work (on Win11) are not.
They used it without having a license. The apache license would have allowed them to use it, but they didn’t meet the conditions.
This sounds equivalent to using paid software without paying to me.
The original author could well claim that “the cost of a license under the terms which they used it is $2M”. After all, the cost of software licenses is entirely arbitrary and set by the author (copyright owner).
reply