That’s rough. I honestly couldn’t do that.

2.5 hours is wild. You spent 5 hours a day commuting?

Users are the cons of everything, including Windows and OSX

I’m far from an expert on licenses, but logic tells me that any version that was released with the previous license is still under that previous license. So it’s probably okay to fork from a previous version to maintain linux support?

Same. My personal Home <-> Work line will never see a Newag train.

Yeah, but I’d rather have the option of a government one than yet another rando company with my sensitive data :)

Well then the site uses a different system that complies with regulations. I don’t see this as a problem, it doesn’t have to be the only service that can verify your age.

Honestly, I’d rather see official governmental third parties that handle ID verification and guarantee to discord and any service needing age verification that the user is over the required age. Not comfortable with sharing any sort of verifying data with private companies, even less american companies. I have to for some stuff, but… Not liking it one bit.

There is already a few countries here in Europe with an official governmental identity verification system, and I’m pretty sure age verification can be done through them. I think the EU is also working on a system covering the entirety of Europe, but not certain.

Except there is no ID/age verification when you create a Google or Microsoft account (no idea about Apple, don’t use that crap), so you’re suggesting that the “birthday” field where I can set whatever date I want should be a standard age verification method?

The only entity able to connect you in this case is the identity verification third party. The premise is that a government-backed identification system is more secure than a rando private company.

Private company asks government “hey is this user real and unique”, government replies “yes”. Private webiste does not need to know your ID. No identifying element needs to be transmitted by the government.

Of course some private companies will need more, and in that case the user, you, can grant them access to data, much like the current authentication systems using Google accounts & co.

In which case the flow would be:

• Rando insecure company asks government “is this user real and unique? I need their name”
• Government website asks you “this rando company wants to know your name”
• You accept
• Goverbment replies to rando insecure conpany “yes, user real, name is X”

That’s how it should be.

My thought exactly. Their definition of privacy is… interesting

Luckily, they don’t own any of Wikipedia’s content, and it’s all downloadable at anytime by anyone wanting to create a mirror.

I’m having a really hard time donating to wikipedia now that I’ve learned they are actually doing pretty well and don’t need donations as urgently as their invasive banners say.

Now, of course their main revenue stream is donations (not only, I don’t have the numbers but they sell commercial access to big tech through a for-profit company, Wikimedia Enterprise). But the whole guilt tripping strategy they’ve been using for a decade without actually needing it is disgusting.

I strongly recommend watching this 10min, sourced video on the topic from fern.

I’d rather donate to non profits that actually need it and yet don’t resort to these emotionally manipulating campaigns.

It’s very, very, very likely to take into accounts a bunch of data bought from all the wonderful companies that track all your habits, especially purchasing habits.

No, that’s if you use their hosted service. It’s free to self-host.

Gen Z is already named “Zoomers”, but it’s not sticking as much as “Gen Z”.

Millenials are also called Gen Y. Millenials just happens to have sticked more. And Gen Z is also called Zoomers.

This onion has way too many layers. I’m lost.

Plenty of countries where 35-40h/week, or even less, is the norm (and I mean it as no “not counted” extra hours)

No it isn’t.

Yes, it is.

No it isn’t. The Quotient is defined as the number obtained when you divide the Dividend by the Divisor. Here it is straight out of Euler…

I’m defining the division operation, not the quotient. Yes, the quotient is obtained by dividing… Now define dividing.

Emphasis on “alternative”, not actual.

The actual is the one I gave. I did not give the alternative definitions. That’s why I said they are also defined based on a multiplication, implying the non-alternative one (understand, the actual one) was the one I gave.

Feel free to send your entire Euler document rather than screenshotting the one part you thought makes you right.

Note, by the way, that Euler isn’t the only mathematician who contributed to the modern definitions in algebra and arithmetics.