God I miss bash.org
I Am Incredibly Strong & And Handsome
God I miss bash.org
This is an insane take based on absolutely nothing.
It is my understanding that a lot of thought and care is put into the design language and appearance of applications and frameworks. However the same level of consideration is not usually afforded to skins and themes, which are often released an never updated again. This can cause usability issues and sometimes even breakages. Of course, people are free to do as they please with their computers.
I do not trust the CEO, the company, or the product. Here are a couple links, I’m certain there are more:
Be aware that Brave is essentially a scam and there are other privacy-focused browsers that might suit your needs.
Luckily Wikipedia articles typically include sources:
https://www.osnews.com/story/24882/the-history-of-app-and-the-demise-of-the-programmer/
This is simply not true.
To add, you could have looked this up before posting a hostile comment on a relative newcomer’s post. This is how linux communities develop reputation of being exclusive & unfriendly.
I would have to disagree. A duopoly sucks, but it’s still better than a monopoly.
Security should be both convenient and default for everyone.
RCS is opt-in. Nothing is changing protocols without your prior consent and knowledge.
SMS and MMS are not very secure however. RCS is technically an open standard. it’s mostly controlled by Google at the moment, but hopefully that will change as Apple enters the game this year.
During COVID and in the immediate years after their production started used Tesla held value well.
This was the case for all vehicles at the time due to the supply chain shortages.
Making a list of people to fuck can be a bit creepy for exactly the reason you mentioned: consent—or the absence of it.
Hold up, let me just make up some numbers real quick to prove how wrong you are!
SourceHut is crap. I’ve found that just because something is open source it doesn’t mean it’s automatically good.
Yes, but the article states that the bond was collateralized by $175 MM in cash—so it must have already been cash or liquidated anyway.
Technically not misogyny—just good ol’ fashioned objectification.
Can you please explain this idea—I’ve not heard it before? And who, specifically, has designed and implemented this?
Leaving this long-term review of a Framework 16 for others to draw conclusions from: https://www.theverge.com/24047424/framework-laptop-16-review