sneak wanted OP to be less openly queer in their personal blog for their own comfort, due to their own inability to imagine that the subculture OP is part of is more than their own narrow definition of it.
I guess the disrespect is clearer when one has grown up with its many forms, but assuming your request for more context comes out of a sincere desire to increase your understanding, I hope this helped.
> assuming your request for more context comes out of a sincere desire to increase your understanding, I hope this helped.
I appreciate the benefit of the doubt -- I was trying to approach it with the assumption that there's probably some perspective that I wasn't aware of.
> sneak wanted OP to be less openly queer in their personal blog for their own comfort
I can see how it may be interpreted that way. To me it read more like "hey, great content, presentation of it wasn't for me" in a way to convey feedback in the event the author wanted to better capture their attention. I didn't get the sense that there was an expectation that the author change their writing style to accommodate their preferences.
re-reading this, I don't think I appreciated that it was really in defense of the readers rather than the content
> I also ask you to be more considerate and respectful of other readers who may enjoy my work
I'm surmising that the real problem statement is:
> I'm sure there are non-sexual furries but the subculture is primarily a sexual one (same as with BDSM)
which I can appreciate as a generalization, I suppose I wouldn't have personally considered furries as under the queer umbrella, but I'm certainly no voice of authority on the matter. I suppose there's also the possibility that 'furries' was a dog whistle for 'queer', and being less charitable to sneak, I could better understand finding disrespect in the post.
So queer the fandom got booted out of the anime cons it spawned out of for being so. Unchained from the narrow views of the anime community, our power only grew.
> sneak wanted OP to be less openly queer in their personal blog for their own comfort, due to their own inability to imagine that the subculture OP is part of is more than their own narrow definition of it.
This is entirely false.
soft_dev_person, what I do want is for you to constrain your assertions about me to facts, and refrain from inaccurate or baseless speculation. It does neither you nor I any favors.
I understand that is what you want, but you cannot reserve yourself from being interpreted when posting on a public forum.
The language you chose to use and the details you chose to focus on is what triggered the response. If your point was that the cartoons was distracting, you could have made that clear in a less disrespectful way (or let the content speak for itself), or perhaps consider if it was worth contributing to the discussion.
Again, you double down on one definition of this particular subculture in another reply. It is reminiscent of how others have tried to define what certain subcultures related to sexual orientation (some now more mainstream) entail, while not being part of them, and I hope you understand how this can be problematic. I appreciate that this may not have been your intention.
Do these metrics count "no framework" as an option? With hooks, context and separation of concerns, most apps can live very well without any "state management framework" at all.
Because complex applications are now delivered as web apps instead of as desktop applications, and these require complex tooling to maintain. Then everyone wanted to use the same tools in other areas (I guess), where it is probably not necessary in a lot of cases. You see similar trends elsewhere (e.g. cloud, k8s), perhaps CV building is the real reason.
Then again, a lot of the complexity is mostly optional these days. But knowing how to avoid it is tricky, given the amount of tutorials online that will happily convince you to use webpack, redux and whatever else that was made for bigger problems as if they should be used everywhere.
I don't envy young programmers these days, the amount of stuff to wade through is just mindblowing.
Indeed, and people always (rightfully) complain loudly against the outlawing of these tools, and in many cases they have been successful. Yet here it's the opposite for some weird reason.
It's true that a lot of the fashion industry appears to be pretty disgusting. But that doesn't mean that it would be better if fewer of the steps were automated.
People can do that right now; they just choose not to. I don't think you can do simple moralising at the state of things and point the blame at a single cause.
Should maybe add security and privacy to that list, in this day and age. Not that it all needs to be implemented right away (depending on jurisdiction you're operating under) but having a plan for how to solve security and privacy considerations and working with that in mind from the start can make it a much less painful experience in the long run.
I probably wouldn't, since it is very use case specific what concerns are relevant. So more a suggestion to get an overview of the security requirements and privacy requirements one needs to deal with at some point and sketch some possible ways to make those requirements easy to solve when the time comes.
Examples of things to consider: zero trust, multi tenancy, permission structures, user data classification (for GDPR removal/extraction requests).
As a European, GDPR has far reaching consequences that may even dictate what other services you rely on. I.e. can you use that SaaS service for your product when it's located outside of the EU/EEC?
I did this on my Android as well, intentionally. My Galaxy S20 defaults to an animation speed that is just so horribly slow, everything feels sluggish. It also uses more battery.
I, too, was a bit confused at the frozen arrow in the beginning, until I realized it was just the loading indicator used when animations are disabled (they could probably improve that one). It is the one place where some sort of movement might still be appropriate.
Anyway, I recently disabled this feature due to it breaking the scroll behaviour in Play Store. Ironically the only app (I've noticed) that uses animation for scrolling in a way that makes this accessibility feature break it, making it a very jarring experience.
Instead, I went into developer tools and scaled all animations down to 0.5x. This at least makes all the annoying transitions bearable. I think this setting should also be exposed under accessibility settings.
Adjusting the animation scaling down is one of the first things I do on any Android phone I buy. I've also changed it for many friends and family who immediately ask how I've managed to make their phones "faster". Not a single person has ever asked me to turn it back. Yet this option is buried in "Developer Tools", so - yes agreed that the "Accessibility Settings" is a far better place. I do also wish it was adjustable in 10% steps all the way down to off. I think 0.3x is likely the sweet spot.
On a Google phone Android, turning off all animations doesn't replace it with a loading icon. It just makes the phone faster.
In Android 12 the Google Android launcher (the desktop, with the non removable Google assistant/search bar), doesn't obey turning off animation. I moved to the Nova launcher.
Like the parent post, every friends and family member I showed how to turn off animations was very pleased with the speedup. Nobody ever asked to turn it back on.
My experience with Postgres FTS (did a comparison with Elastic a couple years back), is that filtering works fine and is speedy enough, but ranking crumbles when the resulting set is large.
If you have a large-ish data set with lots of similar data (4M addresses and location names was the test case), Postgres FTS just doesn't perform.
There is no index that helps scoring results. You would have to install an extension like RUM index (https://github.com/postgrespro/rum) to improve this, which may or may not be an option (often not if you use managed databases).
Either way, writing something that indexes your postgres database into elastic/opensearch is a one time investment that usually pays off in the long run.
You can’t grant access on iOS “to view / edit / delete all/any data”, that’s physically not possible, even with the hidden SDKs that only select parties have access to.
It doesn't change the fact that tracking your detailed location and who you are around in combination can be used to determine your affiliations or sexual orientation. If you, with your secure iPhone, are located around numerous people with Grindr installed, they may jump to conclusions.
They are capable of targeting gays or political opponents with this, which is the point of the story.
I’m not aware of any government back door access, but carriers that I worked with had access to all sorts of crazy hidden SDKs within iOS. For transparency, last time I worked on those was 5-6 years ago, so things may have changed.
Something close to that, AFAIK. But then, it’s not “go download this app from the store”. More like “we steal your phone, jailbreak it, and now we can see everything”. Not sustainable at scale.
If you want to quickly assess the quality of component libraries like these, especially in terms of accessibility, just take a quick look at their Select/Dropdown implementation.
Their variant breaks all keyboard navigation features and doesn't respond as expected to keyboard only input. If they want to up their game, they should address this before moving out of beta.
Even worse, amateurs from overseas with no programming study or talent, trying to quickly create a portfolio to get a remote job. This is how you have websites exploding nowadays.
I guess the disrespect is clearer when one has grown up with its many forms, but assuming your request for more context comes out of a sincere desire to increase your understanding, I hope this helped.