Well I’m guessing they actually did testing on local AI using a 4GB and 8GB RAM laptop and realized it would be an awful user experience. It’s just too slow.

I wish they rolled it in as an option though.

Why didn’t you like Hashicorps Vault? I want to know for my own edification.

I hope so. I don’t want to manage two different address spaces in my head. I prefer if one standard is just the standard.

Display and layout rules aren’t difficult at all. Maybe I’m just not experienced enough. I’ve been a web dev for nearly a decade now and I feel like I’ve got the hang of it. That being said, I don’t work on projects that have to work on everything from a Nokia to an ultra wide monitor. We shoot for a few common sizes and hope it clears between edge cases nicely. What is an example of something that wraps randomly?

Genuinely, though, CSS is fairly clear cut about the rules of positioning and space. Relative positioning is one of the most important concepts to master since it allows things to flow via the HTML structure and not extra CSS. Fixed positioning is as if you had no relative container other than the window itself. Absolute positioning is a little weird, but it’s just like fixed positioning except within the nearest parent with relative positioning.

Everything else is incredibly straight forward. Padding adds space within a container. Margins add space outside a container. Color changes text color. Background-color changes the background color of an element.

Top, left, right, and bottom dictate where the element should be positioned after the default rules are applied. So if you have a relative div inside a parent which is half way down the page, top/right/left/bottom would move the element relative to it’s position within the parent. If you made the div fixed, it would be moved relative to the window.

Lastly, if you’re designing a webpage just think in boxes or rows and columns. HTML can define 75% of the webpage structure. Then with just a bit of CSS you can organize the content into rows/columns. That’s pretty much it. Most web pages boil down to simple boxes within boxes. It just requires reading and understanding but most people don’t want to do that to use CSS since it feels like it should just “know”.

As someone who has built QT, Swing, and JavaFx applications, I way prefer the separation of concerns that is afforded us via HTML JS and CSS.

Would be kind of cool to allow people to choose an install method. As someone who has experienced low bandwidth in rural homes, it would be nice to avoid the waste at the cost of possibly managing chromium versions myself.

That’s the point. The storage is a bad metric. While it might indicate poor performance, it’s not a direct indication of poor performance. The bloat and optimization comes from the usage of Electron. And people use Electron because it’s far easier to make cross-platform deployments for Web and desktop using a framework like Electron. Show me the QT/JavaFX app that mimics Signal and we can compare the cost to develop it. Electron isn’t the best choice for memory usage and reducing bloat, but it’s the best choice for quick development (in my opinion but also proven out by the market share it has)

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

#moustache {
  position: absolute;
  bottom: 10px;
  margin: 0 auto;
}

If that doesn’t work:

#moustache {
  position: absolute;
  bottom: 10px;
  left: 50%;
  transform: translateX(-50%);
}

Relative positioning is preferred but not always available if the parent face is positioned absolutely.

Edit: adjusted bottom from 0 -> 10px since 0 would be at the bottom of the chin but there is obviously some padding to bring it nearer the lip

Based solely on that quote, I whole heartedly agree. Science fiction is almost always supposed to expose something about our world through a different lens. Whilst it’s not the most elegant example, the two black & white striped races in TOS arguing over “black-white stripes vs white-black stripes” was a clear allegory for racism in our country when the show came out. District 9 is a decent allegory for something like Gaza & Israel: open air prisons and what-not.

Science fiction should (IMO) make the muddy waters of morality more clear.

A more nuanced example comes from Battlestar Galactica; wherein the human members of a concentration camp use suicide bombing as a means of rebellion. The show made sure to imply the efficacy of suicide bombing. It also made sure to expose the arguments against it. But I think during a post 9/11 world, suicide bombing was looked at as the root of all evil. Perpetrators were seen as aimless villains without a cause or reason (without a rational one, anyways). But BSG did make a compelling argument for such extreme cases of terrorist violence when your back is up against the wall.

The bajorans in DS9 also make cases for terrorism as an act of rebellion against colonizers.

I think science fiction is one of the only genres they really take a look at these topics. Other genres seem to only gleam the very tips of the morality iceberg.

I guess I’ll be holding onto my Toyota 2004 Camry until the day I die.

I hate this kind of sneaky behavior. I hope GM and/or LexisNexis gets torn asunder during the civil litigations. Google has had this data for years… I must assume they aren’t providing it to insurance companies yet.

They probably have tutorials on their website. Most MVC frameworks have pretty decent guides.

Cause if you don’t forget your own stainless steel, you can’t be trained on proper defibrillator techniques?

I was comparing it to civil or mechanical engineering. I agree that programming/software is growing and “infiltrating” our lives. That’s why I think it will become a licensed/certified term in the future. Software engineer will require a cert and some products will require certified engineers. Whereas web apps developers (most likely) will not use that title most of the time and we will just bifurcate those who work on “critical software” and those that do not.

Well that’s my point. The term “engineer” is protected in a lot of other industries but not software.

Software engineering is just what any “engineering” field would be if they didn’t have standards. We have some geniuses and we have some idiots.

Mechanical engineers, civil engineers, electrical engineers, etc. are often forced to adhere to some sort of standard. It means something to say “I’m a civil engineer” (in most developed nations). You are genuinely liable in some instances for your work. You have to adhere to codes and policies and formats.

Software engineering is the wild west right now. No rules. No standards. And in most industries we may never need a standard because software rarely kills.

However, software is becoming increasingly important in our daily lives. There will likely come a day wherein similar standards take precedence and the name “software engineer” is only allowed to those who adhere to those standards and have the proper certs/licenses. I believe Canada already does this.

Software engineers would be responsible for critical software, e.g: ensuring phones connecting to an emergency operator don’t fail, building pacemakers, securing medical records, etc. I know some of these tasks already have “experts” behind them. But I don’t think software has any licensing/governing.

Directly opposed to “engineering” would be the grunt work which I do.

Just divide that number by two until it’s small enough to make the request under the free version.

I know what you mean. I wish more stuff could just be packed in glass jars with the little popping seal. If it’s popped, it has been opened. I don’t know if everything can handle the pressure difference… But it seems ideal. Plus then the glass jars and aluminum lids can be recycled.

Yeah that’s a fair assessment. But I like the description that they are “careful”. I forget who wrote it, but I remember someone saying that humans rise to the top of the social ladder quickly because we are not careful. We are willing to risk our lives testing a warp drive a day after inventing it. Meanwhile Vulcans would study the warp drive mechanics for a hundred years before testing it out. Vulcans are logically driven, but their logic attempts to preserve life as much as possible (ignoring wedding traditions). Humans use our lives more like Klingons - exploring is our sole form of glory. Klingons seek glory in war. We seek out new life and new civilizations because that is our cause.

So are Vulcans careful and arguably fearful? Sure. But I like the idea of logic as a driver, so I tend to lean towards that since it’s more “canon”.