I looked into the document and man, that’s a lot of points.

Skimming it, it’s all very vague and does acknowledge states autonomy over what they consider legal or not. But there is so much in it, and the general broad and cooperative and sharing nature of it certainly warrants skepticism and concern - especially with how different cooperating states can be, and how such a push may have unintended side effects.

Who are these people you portray? Do they even exist?

The China equivalence is so far off. The surveillance systems, the press coverage, the open criticism, and the pretext/goals are all very different between China and this.

In German we say “doppelt hält besser”. Is there an English saying like that? “Twice is stronger/more stable/holds better.”

Lol at taking over open tabs from Chrome.

Does the default-enabled dialog happen in EU too? Seems unlikely to be GDPR conforming, which requires explicit, informed consent, with an equal decline option.

Installable alternative: https://zealdocs.org/

Given that it is high level, I assume you did not want to include this. I’ll mention it here in a comment either way. Text form in the commit message.

I really like using conventional commit messages and introduced it in my projects. We defined a few types, and more leniently choose optional scopes. It’s very useful for categorizing and skimming through commit lists, and for generating changelogs/release notes. `fix(account): Use correct hasing xy"

Consistent imperative form is important to me too. The commit message examples talks about “Summary of changes”, which has no verb, and so, may mislead to a different undesirable form of summarizing changes. (“Change xy” instead of “changed xy” or “[now] does xy [at runtime]” or “did z”.)

I didn’t fully read it, only skimmed, so excuse me if I missed mentions of the commit message text form. It seems very elaborate otherwise.

My browser has a default font size of 18 set. The site overrides that with a default base font size of 12px, then increases it to 13px for content text. That’s way too small for me on my screen. At least to read it comfortably. Or for people who need more accessible text/font.

The field is incredibly broad. Choose a field or employer or project that’s not doing that an you’re fine.

Are you sure? I’m not very active in that ecosystem, but if that was prevalent in the past, surely there’s still tutorials and stuff out there that people would follow and create such projects even today?

More than that, it seems to me that the official python docs for packaging [still] talks about setup.py. Why would people not use that?

got it; arse

It would certainly be an issue if you didn’t have one

The problem was named after an incident in 1996 in which AOL’s profanity filter prevented residents of the town of Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire, England, from creating accounts with AOL, because the town’s name contains the substring “cunt”.

haha

those are terms, this is substrings within words

I haven’t seen branches or variables being called arse

Then again, I do like to catch exceptions as up so I can throw up

Simple changes require only simple reviews.

Responsibility is shared. It’s not one or the other.

Many people don’t know what they’re doing. That’s kind of expected. But a tool provider and seller should know what they’re doing. Enabling people to behave in a negative way should be questioned. Maybe it’s a consequence of enablement, or maybe it’s bad design or marketing. Where criticism is certainly warranted.

Commit with Co-authored-by: Copilot

or maybe better --author=Copilot

It would certainly help evaluate submissions to have that context

he l p

looks like a multi-threading or concurrency issue

each function has its own independent metal toggle switch

one steering wheel to steer left, and one to steer to the right

they want to push a lot of buttons on those controls

LOL

Even with a lot of buttons available, good videogame controls are simple and narrow. Natural combinations add depth without overcomplicating things.

OS stands for “Oh Shit!”

Python’s major pro is its simple, straightforward syntax, which excels at data handling. This has made it popular with novices of all shades […]

For first-timer coders, Python is easier to learn, understand, and adapt than many low-level programming languages […]

Is python being easy to learn actually true? I can see it being easier than low-level programming. But there’s other alternatives like C# and Java that certainly seem much better and easier to me. Especially when you consider the ecosystem around only writing code.

Plus, the Python language is a steadfast feature in the desktop Linux software landscape. It’s preinstalled on most Linux distributions, boasts extensive library support, and can be used to fashion very cool (as well as very basic) Qt, GTK, and other toolkit UIs.

It’s certainly available, and more readily available on Linux. The whole v2 v3 mess was lackluster. But I guess preinstalled is convenient, and more accessible than installable Java or whatever.

I’ve never seen JavaScript or Python popularity as evidence or correlating with actual qualities. More with a self-promoting usage. Python was being used in science, then in AI, then AI became popular. To me, it seems like a natural propagation consequence more than simplicity or features over other frameworks and languages.