They are not made of straw, either.

They’ve decided who their customers are, and it’s not you

Since FF is free - isn’t that a given?

For Windows 11, it would be an ad for Hitler instead of just a picture.

Did you really dodge a bullet though? Or did the bullet stop midair and changed direction to move toward what was up until now the most logical location to dodge to?

Some of you have never Wanna be the Guy and it shows.

Meatn’t

XML is good for markup. The problem is that people too often confuse “markup” and “serialization”.

You are assuming here that I know what I want. What if there is no obviously correct answer, and even in the Everett branch that generates the optimal content for the file I’ll still think it can be improved and tell it to destroy the universe?

What if there is no correct answer?

I just use this:

#!/bin/bash

keep_generating=1
while [[ $keep_generating == 1 ]]; do
    dd if=/dev/random of=$1 bs=1 count=$2 status=none
    echo Contents of $1 are:
    cat $1
    echo
    read -p "Try generating again? " -s -n1 answer
    while true; do
        case $answer in
            [Yy] )
                echo
                break
                ;;
            [Nn] )
                keep_generating=0
                break
                ;;
            *)
        esac
        read -s -n1 answer
    done
done

I vote for “OF-Model/Simp”.

I’d argue it’s not the tent itself that sucks as much as the lack of access to things like toilet, shower, and electricity.

Find a camping store and steal a tent.

Charging the poor more is, first and foremost, stupid. Giving them bad products and/or services that will cost them more in the long run? That I can see. But you never want to charge them more upfront. You’ll always want to charge the rich more, because the rich have more money and are more willing to spend it (when it benefits them), and you want them to give you that money.

Joel Spolsky wrote a great post about this two decades ago (and it’s still relevant today). The idea is as follows:

Lets say you have two potential customers - one rich who can afford to buy your product for $2 and one poor who can only afford to buy it for $1. If you charge $1 you’ll be able to sell it to both of them and get $2. If you charge $2 you’ll only sell to the rich - also getting $2.

Joel says that if you find a way (e.g. - by creating different versions) to sell it to the rich customer for $2 and the poor customer for $1 - you’ll get $3. Which is more than $2.

You, on the other hand, suggest that it’s going to get offered to the rich customer for $1 and the poor customer for $2. But then the poor customer won’t be able to afford it. They won’t be it or maybe even steal it - either way you won’t get $2 from them. You’ll only get the $1 from the rich customer.

$1 is less than $3. It’s even less than $1. If you want to earn money - this is the worst outcome. Why do you think capitalists hate the poor more than they love money?

He does though. He has committed ostrochities you cannot imagine!

I fear this is the wrong take on this issue. The rule communities should follow should not be “make sure to get the facts right so that you don’t excommunicate those who get the facts right”. It should be “don’t excommunicate people who get the facts wrong, because you never know if you got them right yourself and if you punish dissidents too hard you’ll never be able to shift toward the correct world view”.

Why parse the HTML manually when sed is a standard utility and you can use it to parse it with regex?

So you end up with the same number of days off but a bit of flexibility on how to use them.

That’s the problem - sick days should not have a “flexibility” aspect to them. You take them when you are sick, so that you can heal and so that you can avoid infecting other people.

Since you don’t have a choice about being sick, ideally there shouldn’t be a choice about whether or not you take a sick day - but realistically this can’t be tightly enforced (at least not with reasonable measures), that it ends up relying on good will, and that there will always be incentives to fake sickness in order to take sick days and incentives to ignore sickness and still go to work (and these incentives don’t balance each other out - they incentivize different people differently, widening the gap of unfairness)

But still - even if you accept that real life have such deficiencies - this does not mean one should create policies that make them even more deficient!