Yeah I feel like if you could do a normal car wash that'd even be somewhat more practical, but having this specific sequence of solutions and soaps. It's so wild they published that recommendation seriously
I've actually found that I cannot add too many more ports without it being a powered USB hub. Expanding 3-4 is fine, but if you're trying to add on like 10-15, it won't work unless the hub is powered.
All of that interest is from people making computers, or people who manage security. Not from people that use computers as part of their life/work (in contrast to those who's work is entirely about the computer itself). From a usability standpoint, this type of sandboxing for every app is cumbersome and all it leads to is users finding unsafe work arounds. I used to be able to use my android phone much more as a regular computer than I can now. And I wanted to make a simple app for myself to allow me to automatically copy and catalog photos from my cameras sd card to an external HDD, and I literally cannot do this without jumping through a million permissions and API hoops on Android even though I never plan on publishing this app for others to use. It became such a pain to figure out how to get access to the folders I would need, I just gave up on the entire project. I essentially needed a tool to systematically copy and rename files, and it's nearly impossible because of these nonsensical policies.
Even if they aren't earning income, they should be able to show they had a product/prototype actually built with the patent before the company they're using developed their product. That way legitimate patent holders who weren't able to monetize their technology but had a working prototype will still be able to protect their patents. So many times, patent trolls hold patents to "ideas" rather than working inventions with prototypes.
Sure except that we already have computers where every app uses the same folder structure, just with some files/folders protected with elevated permissions that aren't accessible to every app. We already have a solution that works and every desktop OS uses. Why would mobile go for a solution that isn't actually usable?
I think someone who's committed murder is a perfect analogy actually. For people who serve their time or whatever after committing murder, there's no legal standing for not employing them. You might feel uncomfortable as their coworker, which is totally valid. You may also believe that there is no forgiveness or second chances after committing certain crimes like rape and murder. But unless the employer has a good reason why an ex-murderer cannot perform their work duties or is currently doing illegal things at work, I don't think they can not hire them just based off of that.
I'm not sure what you consider to be people on the ground, but one would argue the people publishing peer reviewed research in the field have dedicated a significant part of their lives to that topic and are as "on the ground" as possible when it comes to their area of expertise.
I think this is mostly because it's a smaller community overall so when you're in those politically minded subreddits, it's all the same opinion. I think it'll change as lemmy grows and more people with diverse experiences and outlooks join the discussions.
I'm not that old! I had Nickelodeon and Disney Channel and Cartoon Network, but there were still Saturday morning cartoons on WB and PBS. The Saturday morning cartoons weren't as good as the others but it was still something special about the mornings.
Yeah this sounds like someone doesn't know rust and instead of learning it they're porting to Java? It might also be a way to capture an existing userbase as it's still compatible with lemmy, but also adds features that might cause more people to use it. But being written in Java is an excuse to make it more difficult to migrate the additions back upstream to lemmy. Maybe they hope that this will eventually allow them to build out a private platform?
Awesome thanks!