If it doesn't have any effect, why bother protesting?

They are like PDFs in that they do not render the same with different software or on different devices.

I would say PDFs are actually reasonably consistent though. Weird things happen on occasion, but I've certainly had more success than with SVGs.

They are reasonably consistent because there is a de-facto reference implementation (Adobe Acrobat) which, if your implementation does not match exactly, users will think your implementation is broken.

There isn't such an implementation for SVG.

We live in a world where Adobe set the standard, and anything that didn't render like Adobe was considered "incorrect".

You definitely don't understand PDFs, let alone SVGs.

PDFs can also contain scripts. Many applications have had issues rendering PDFs.

Don't get me wrong, the folks creating the SVG standard should've used their heads. This is like the 5th time (that I am aware of) this type of issue has happened, (and at least 3 of them were Adobe). Allowing executable code in an image/page format shouldn't be a thing.

Yes, that's exactly what I want. Everything shifts with dst - business processes, people's working hours, ach windows, ...

It has been years, when will it not be too early?

Something I'm noticing is that people in my network have lost some kind of concept of time passing

I had a conversation with an acquaintance a few weeks ago who was adamant that ChatGPT only really showed up less than a year ago. They were absolutely mind blown when I pointed out that ChatGPT got crazy popular literally years ago, late 2022, early 2023. They were convinced this was still very new stuff, like 8 months ago or so

I don't really blame people either. Personally I feel like the years since COVID have been a weird blur. People don't realize that lockdowns were half a decade ago already

> People don't realize that lockdowns were half a decade ago already

Myself included. My perception of time has been off ever since, and 2020 quite literally feels like it was just last year.

Same for my peers. I'd really be curious to see some study done on this, and why this distorted perception of time exists now. I'm not sure I can attribute it to lock-down necessarily. I was already fully remote pre-COVID, and my habits nor work schedule changed during lock downs other than wearing a mask whenever I left the house.

I just assumed it was me getting old, but I do go "oh yeah that time when" and then realizing that was a literal decade ago. It all does just bleed together, COVID feels like it was just yesterday, 2015 feels like it was just last year, 2001 feels like a decade ago but that was 24 years.

I still just blame it on being old though.

Let's see what the MBAs are trying, what is sticking, and how long that takes:

On-prem to cloud -- took about 10 years. De-facto success.

Blockchain to new age of finance -- 12 years later, not much success overall (Instant regret on anyone dumb enough to buy junk crypto and NFTs)

Quantum computing -- 10ish years later, nothing major, but it might bear fruit long-term.

LLMs -- Let's average all the above and say 11 years from 2022. So 2033 is when you can say it was a bust.

Yes, it gets a trailing comma if it's on it's own line. That way when you add/remove arguments in a multi-line call it's only a one-line diff. This doesn't apply when the diff is only one line anyway.

Who's to say you don't add a new argument to the function in the future, like

    my_print(
        "This string has two parameters, `a` which is equal to {a} and `b` which is equal to {b}",
        a=1,
        b=2,
        color_negative_red=True,
    )

> it gets a trailing comma if it's on it's own line.

Sorry but it doesn't make any sense to me. If your argument is "a trailing comma is a good thing," it should go into any and all function calls/list declarations/etc. Who's to say I won't add this in the future:

    my_print("a={a}, b={b}", a=1, b=2, color_negative_red=True)

So do I need to have this now?

    my_print("a={a}, b={b}", a=1, b=2,)

There's a very responsive playground at https://black.vercel.app/ and whatever it does looks strange to me, because the underlying assumptions look inconsistent one with the other (to my eye at least.) Specifically, "the length of the string should decide whether there is a trailing comma or there isn't" makes zero sense.

>Sorry but it doesn't make any sense to me. If your argument is "a trailing comma is a good thing," it should go into any and all function calls/list declarations/et

No, the argument is quite specifically that a one line diff to add a new argument/element to the end of a list is preferable to a two line diff to do the same thing. The presence of the trailing comma is necessary to achieve that only when elements are on their own line.

Ok, we're then back to `print` example:

    print(
        'Hello there from a very long line abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz',
        sep=' ', 
        end='\n', 
        file=None, 
        flush=False,
    )

All of the existing named parameters to `print()` function are already provided, and that standard function is highly unlikely to change. Should I add another string to `print`, I will have to do it before the named parameters anyway. There is no sense in the trailing comma here however you look at it.

Edit: sorry for using single quotes, in my 20 years of writing Python it was never an issue, but now with `black` it apparently is.

I think this boils it down to the essence. Whether you use a trailing comma here, and whether you use single or double quotes, is just bike-shedding. If there's an automated tool that can make a consistent choice everywhere, that's worthwhile.

The infrastructure has to be maintained year round, not just the summer months when lake houses are full. I don't think it's reasonable to expect affordable month-to-month pricing.

A tall wall is nothing, there used to be a stadium with a hill in play: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daikin_Park#Tal's_Hill

Shebang lines are semantic comments too

Not necessarily-while many languages which accept shebangs use hash as a line comment introducer, others don’t, but nonetheless will accept a shebang at the start of a file only. e.g. some Lisp interpreters will ignore the first line of a source file if it starts with #!, but otherwise don’t accept # as comment syntax.

That probably depends where you live. A lot of Nordic people tell me the learnt English as a kid watching cartoons, long before they were thinking of such things.

we learn english because it is a subject in school. money does not come into consideration for most people. the motivation to teach english in school is another question however. as is the motivation for parents to pay for extra english classes outside of school.

> If for some reason your mail server is flagged by Gmail's systems, then it only won't reach Gmail users.

This is a deal breaker for most people and organizations. Not being able to send email to the largest email provider is orders of magnitude more important than upholding some values about decentralization and independence.

Sure, but that's a problem with that provider, not with the service or protocol.

If you're not allowed to shop at Walmart, that might be an inconvenience, but it doesn't stop you from shopping anywhere else. That is the point of decentralized protocols. They prevent a single entity from creating a monopoly over the entire market. It's not just a philosophical argument about independence.

Besides, even Gmail obeys standard email features like DKIM, DMARC and SPF. As long as your server is not on the same network as known spammers, and doesn't have the usual spam signals, there is little chance that your emails will be blocked.

But if Walmart has a monopoly over certain goods, it is more than an inconvenience to be banned from Walmart. If your email server cannot deliver mail to 25% of all active email addresses, that's more than an inconvenience.

We can quibble about semantics, but those examples are not caused by centralization.

Yes, any company can take advantage of their position to influence the market, and in most cases this is illegal.

If a manufacturer only offers their products in Walmart, and some users can't access Walmart, then that's a problem specific to that provider and manufacturer. And the same applies for Gmail. *This is not because decentralized protocols "trend" towards centralization.* It is because there will always be popular providers that people gravitate towards for whatever reason. But again, this doesn't prevent anyone from using email without depending on Google _at all_.

The difference from that situation and issues caused by actual centralization is night and day. I'll stop replying to this kind of rebuttal, since it seems people struggle to understand the difference.

> That is the point of decentralized protocols. They prevent a single entity from creating a monopoly over the entire market.

Eh, I would phrase it differently -- decentralized protocols ensure that new competition can stand up services.

There's nothing about them that inherently prevents monopolies from forming, as this thread discusses re:Gmail. Usually there are enough value adds around the decentralized protocol that a smart first mover can establish a de facto monopoly.