bjorney

Fair - point still stands though - the application only has a single breakpoint defined at 600sp from a cursory glance, the lack of an ultra-wide specific layout is just because it hasn’t been implemented rather than a shortfall of GTK (though I’m not sure you would even want to make the message view wider, as it would impair readability)

That looks like it’s just wrapping a WebView, is it not?

It looks like the CSS is just capping the container class width at 1440px, which has nothing to do with GTK

“[…] In exchange for a waiver of fees accrued since 2023”

Sounds like Oracle got them with the good 'ol “buy an even bigger license or we’ll sue you”

I would assume the radiographer working in the ER sees a lot more foreign-body-up-the-butt cases than the one working in a cardiologists office.

Also I’ve never had a specialist take my dental X-rays, it’s always the hygienist or dentist

There are low powered FM transmitters you can get for your car

FM transmitter plugs into cigarette lighter for power

iPod connects to FM transmitter via AUX cord

You tune your cars radio to whatever frequency the transmitter is set to, and it plays whatever your iPod is playing

But AMD has been making leaps and bounds improving their GPU software

They are still largely shitting the bed here. Their ROCm installer won’t run on Ubuntu 25.04 last time I checked, and the 9070xt won’t work on OSs that ROCm DOES support because the kernel and graphics stack is too old.

ROCm has been “almost ready” to be a drop-in replacement for CUDA for almost a decade. I feel like it literally would take nvidia ceasing to exist to give them the critical mass to push it over the finish line

It’s the best time I’ve had with a game since BG3 - gameplay is ‘just’ good, but the story and design are next level

We’re at a point where it’s no longer profitable for individual miners

We have been at that point since GPU mining stopped being feasible in 2014, it’s just gotten worse. ASICs made it so the only people who could profit off mining were people who could place a wholesale sized order of hardware from bitmain, etc. Anyone else who claimed to be mining profitably was likely someone who was:

1. buying old hardware 2nd hand (or new hardware at MSRP) and capitalizing on free electricity in their rental
2. not selling their Bitcoin immediately (they weren’t making money from mining, they were making it from speculating)
3. lived in Quebec and could double dip (North America’s cheapest grid + free heating for 8 months of the year)

unless there’s a radical change in bitcoin’s algorithm

The algorithm already does this though. Every 2016 blocks if it took more than 10 minutes per block, the difficulty of mining bitcoin goes down, not up. This is why every halving event you see a radical drop in difficulty, because at a given kWh you are producing half as many bitcoin - meaning people turned off their miners because it’s less profitable. The flipside is the rate of issuance goes down, so there is a lower inflationary effect, and the price of Bitcoin usually also skyrockets (which means eventually these miners re-enter, and difficulty eventually goes back to where it was). It can never get to a point where Bitcoin mining is completely unprofitable unless the price goes to zero, because there will always be a guy with a solar panel and fully paid-off hardware who can mine it for free. Granted, it can get to a point where a lot of people have to take a huge loss on capital expenditures if the price nosedives and never recovers

Miners like Riot Blockchain are operating at a loss

I’m not a finance wizard, but I peeked at their last SEC filing, and first 3 quarters of 2024 they posted a 35m operating loss, but added almost 900m worth of assets to their balance sheet (mostly Bitcoin), which to me tells a very different story

The quote is actually from the article this one paraphrased and linked to, while leaving out all of the actual, you know, information

New data tells us that mining a single Bitcoin or one BTC costs the largest public mining companies over $82,000 USD, which is nearly double the figure it did the previous quarter. Estimates for smaller organisations say you need to spend about $137,000 to get that single BTC in return. BTC is currently only valued at $94,703 USD, which seems to be a problem in the math department.

Bitcoin mining will always be profitable for the people with the cheapest electricity and largest economies of scale. There is a difficulty adjustment algorithm in the protocol that ensures this. When the price tanks people turn off thier miners, difficulty adjusts downwards, and then it takes less electricity to find a block.

tl;dr title is wrong

OP said it was to notify you when an alarm went off, not when it ran out of batteries.

You seem content to entirely gloss over the issue, which isn’t the pros/cons of a particular writing style, it’s that the maintainer could have said ANY of the things you said, but he didn’t

If I was the maintainer, I too would probably reject the PR because it didn’t remove the gender entirely.

Cool, but that isn’t what happened here. The PR was closed immediately because the maintainer considered using gender neutral pronouns “personal politics” - he had ample opportunity to clarify his stance, or simply comment ‘resubmit in passive voice’, but he didn’t. Clearly the problem wasn’t the active voice, it was the summary of the change, because when that exact same PR was re-submitted much later with a commit message of ‘Fix some minor ESL grammar issues’, it was accepted with no discussion

As an aside, I absolutely disagree with the use of passive voice. It’s more verbose, and harder for the reader to comprehend. It’s why every style guide (APA, Chicago, IEEE, etc) recommends sticking to active voice, especially in the context of ‘doing things’.

If goes against established norms here

What’s the established norm here. All people compiling software by source are male?

he said politically motivated changes aren’t welcome

What’s politically motivated about changing “he” to “they”. As you said, gender doesn’t apply here, so the neutral word is literally preferable.

Yes, I’m sure that PR would have been accepted instead /s

But you’re right, it doesn’t matter at all, the reasonable thing to do would have been for the guy to spend 3 seconds clicking the accept and merge button, or 6 seconds making your change. instead he wrote a comment stating that inclusive language has no place in his project

https://github.com/SerenityOS/serenity/pull/6814#issuecomment-830793992

Really?

This screams “women not wanted” to me

If the code doesn’t change, the resulting docker image will have the same hash, and a new image won’t be created

https://github.com/jackett/jackett/releases

Jackett is literally just releasing a new version every day

and I’ve encountered zero bugs so far

This is my only complaint - it crashes a lot for me

Especially because it’s to a newbie, who stands to benefit the most from using an OS with more user share and more available online resources.