Executing an innocent person is never just. A judge of the justice system must be just above anything else like politics or outside consequences.
The judge does not "let the people riot". Saying it like that misleads into thinking so. The judge is not the active part in that. The rioters are the actors and can and must be brought to justice when they can/later.
It's not on the judge to weigh on outsiders and outside consequences. They must gather and assess the concern at hand concerning a person at hand. Outside factors are irrelevant. Influences onto the case may be relevant, but not the other way around.
If a judge and by consequence the justice system loses it's justice and fairness it loses all of its most important, primary, and possibly single responsibility and trust. Without a just justice system, it is bound to end up will all manner of corruption, arbitrariness, and secondary factors of no societal trust in a justice system (leading people to execute self-justice; what the example tried to evade in the first place).
Installation is supported on all modern desktop and mobile devices. Whether the PWA can be installed by the browser on the operating system differs by browser/operating system combination. Most browsers support installing PWAs on all operating systems—Chrome OS, MacOS, Windows, Android, Linux, etc.—directly or when an extension is installed.
Apple is unique when it comes to PWAs: PWAs can be installed on macOS from any browser except Safari. The opposite is true for iOS versions before 16.4, where PWAs could only be installed in Safari. PWAs can be installed on iOS/iPadOS 16.4 or later from any supporting browser.
Apparently, it's not an official extension by Mozilla either, but published by a third party.
The advantage of browser pwa is that they work without plugins.
Separate app is good for separation, and can at times oder better performance. Browser allows for low barrier, existing browser use. Either can be preferable.
What does the code represent? What does it concern?
Focusing on the code and pattern too much may mislead. My thinking is primarily on composition and concern. The rest follows intuitively - fee with risk, gain, and effort assessment.
I've had occasional instances where code duplication is fine or not worth to fix/factor. But I feel like most of the time distinct concerns are easy and often important to factor.
All of the information presented via the API is intended to be open data, free to use for any purpose. As a public service of the United States Government, we do not charge any fees for the usage of this service
The survival related ones came to have names because they are integral to survival. People needed to address them, and so they did. With local isolation or dialects or divergence.
Okay, taxi, cola became popular and expanded their reach. They did not arise in individual and dispersed areas, they traveled.
It's not a what-you-see-is-what-you-get editor website builder like OP seems to ask for. You definitely need some editing or at least Markdown markup.
But I personally can recommend getting into that.
If it's mostly about the content and text content Hugo may be a very good option and starting point into website creation/development. Because it generates static webpages it can be hosted for free too - e.g. on GitHub pages.
If they want to play around, move and modify the layout and positioning though they'll have to dive at least a little bit into HTML and CSS, or use a different tool.
They're related. I was merely adding context here, because the comment only said it is related, but not how. (Hence why I put the supposed question in italics.) The context I would have liked to immediately know if I want to follow the link or not.
I can see your point, and agree with it for the most part. But they're still posting on Asklemmy implying it is a question or interest of reason. It also doesn't dismiss a person directly/specifically, nor is the tone insulting.
OP tone is mainly confusion with an open question. They disclose their belief/understanding which they acknowledge either contradicts or puts into question the evident state of things they see.
I don't see how that's confrontational similar to the commenter dismissing their whole approach as a definite statement without points you could argue. It's a closed dismissal and in an insulting tone.
What makes you think they are similar? Or to what degree?
Why are you taking such a confrontational approach?
Original commenter and you give no information on what makes Signal better. Signal is outside of the topic scope anyway, but would be a fair extension of it. Instead you use an insulting tone and completely dismiss their approach.
And this shit gets more up than downvotes. Makes it clear this platform has group-think toxicity issues too, moreso than promoting fair and good-intention discussion.
Kissaki @ Kissaki @feddit.de Posts 5Comments 635Joined 2 yr. ago
I'm a bit confused. Did you set up your browser to clear your sessions on exit?
Regular Browsers have pinned tabs too, so what makes Tangram different?