What a neat coincidence that both this and the rule book for the other Star Trek TTRPG have both been posted within the last few days. Are there any others we should know about, LOL?

Heck, if HA knew for certain it was a workday, it could boot the laptop for me…hmmm. Maybe something to think about for the future.

I’ve been meaning to look into how to integrate HA with a NextCloud CalDAV server or something, because I have a lot of ideas for automations that would be best triggered by calendar events (e.g. ringing an alarm [get ready time] + [travel time] before [appointment]).

He didn’t know his son existed until like 5 minutes before he was killed.

Right column, second checkbox from the bottom.

They aren’t “languages for OS” either. They’re scripting languages, and they’re being used for scripts. In other words, they’re there because they aren’t worse and in fact are the right tool for the job.

Those are not “system languages.” Even without actually checking, I’m confident enough to assume that their presence in the kernel repository is as support scripts and such, not stuff that actually gets included in the kernel when it’s compiled.

Final EDIT: Reading it myself few times, a pizza bakery example is not optimal

Yeah, I kept getting hung up on the notion of toppings being sliced or grated to-order, rather than bought from Sysco pre-prepped in big plastic bags like any normal pizzaria would do. Your analogy be fancy!

Use fewer loops and more comprehensions.

Also, for the love of $DEITY, embrace EAFP!

If you want a high-strength part and you have carbon fiber and a 3D printer, what you want to do is 3D print a mold and then apply the carbon fiber and resin to it by hand (either laminated or “forged”).

I wish I had a chance to go to that before it shut down.

In other words, you’re saying it has to be specifically copyleft (which is the only kind that guarantees that all downstream users will always be able to look at the source code), not merely permissively-licensed. Sounds good to me!

I feel like if the main advantage of something is that it’s easy to sue, it’s probably a bad choice to begin with. Instead, your criteria should probably be more about minimizing the chance of things going that wrong.

Free Software has an important advantage on that front too, by the way: you have the recourse of being allowed to fix it yourself. That is kinda the whole point of why RMS invented it in the first place, after all!

Trustworthy as opposed to what, some random proprietary product? Do you think you’re gonna somehow do better on that front with code that’s secret?

Now, don’t get me wrong: I’m not saying that every Free Software project is trustworthy. I’m just saying that as a first-pass screening criterium, rejecting everything that isn’t Free Software is a pretty good one.

The even bigger issue is that AFAIK every single one of those things is really intended more for things like roller shades, not venetian blinds, and automates the raising/lowering, not the tilt.

Speaking for myself, if I were going to settle for a solution that only automated one function instead of both, it would need to be the tilting, not the raising/lowering.

I also looked for that sort of thing recently and basically came up empty.

I’ve suddenly just realized Neelix is alien Guy Fieri. Same hair, same clothes, same attitude, same job (basically)…

First of all, that’s not really the point. The goal of Free Software was always about trying to ensure users maintained sovereignty over their computers, so they couldn’t be exploited by DRM and other forms of enshittification.

Second, while copyleft doesn’t get developers paid directly, it does at least given them a fairer chance to compete on more equal footing with big tech companies that would otherwise embrace and (closed-source) extend if it were permissively-licensed.

Fuck this bullshit. This problem was of your own making, Bruce, by pushing “Open Source” and permissive licensing over “Free Software” and copyleft.

The DMCA safe-harbor provision requires them to act on takedown claims with little-to-no vetting. In contrast, counter-claims are made under penalty of perjury. It’s a deliberately unfair system that puts the person who wants to censor the content at a huge advantage over the person who wants to keep using it.

I didn’t call it a “shitty java clone;” I called it a “shitty Java-coattail-riding monstrosity.” There’s a difference.

Specifically, I was referring to how the only reason it was created – the only reason using an existing language wasn’t good enough – was to capitalize on Java’s hype, not claiming that there was any sort of meaningful technical resemblance (because aside from both having vaguely Algol-style syntax, there isn’t).