auxiliarymoose

3D mice and other hardware may run a local server for web applications to use them as input methods. The dialog can also show up if you are using network security software which proxies requests via private IP address range. Plenty of other non-nefarious reasons too...

Safari and Firefox allow this by default without a prompt or visible indicator (but maybe that has changed now that Chrome added its dialog).

Yep, I've been importing CDs to Apple Music (which I buy from my local music store) and adding them to my Android phone for personal listening. It's a great way to spend money on music in a way that supports local businesses!

Thanks for the catch! Fixed :-)

Well, it's posted on Hacker News which is a general audience including people working on electrical/signal/audio/radio-frequency systems among other things (not just low-level network code) where BPF has a different meaning, so I think disambiguation is appropriate.

~Well, if you asked a randomly-chosen person (technical or non-technical) they would probably say NASA is "the organization that does the space things" — it's pretty well-known~

~On the other hand, BPF means different things in different domains, and isn't ubiquitous in the same way~

Edit: I should have written it out, that's on me :-)

Sure, but if you are sharing with a general audience (where people aren't necessarily coming from your own domain) it's a good idea to make the writing accessible.

My first thought would have been Band-Pass Filter, which is also a filter potentially related to computer systems.

I work in an industry with a lot of Three-Letter Acronyms (TLAs) and eXtended Three-Letter Acronyms (XTLAs) (sometimes known as Four-Letter Acronyms (FLAs)), and there they are often overloaded in their meanings. So in my experience, being clear about the definition is helpful to readers so they can immediately understand the document without having to triangulate meanings from the rest of the document.

Alternatively, it is a conscious decision to help prevent users from causing complicated situations.

Given a highly configurable system, users will find ways to (unintentionally) tie it into knots, so adding some guardrails can help reduce complexity demons down the line (both in the technical implementation and the user experience).

I guess I prefer to give people making things the benefit of the doubt.

federated hardware (a bunch of raspberry pis networked into a high availability kubernetes cluster, hidden across various local coffee shops for free power and bandwidth)

It's easy to convert because CSG is a small subset of what BREP can do.

It's analogous to "all squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares" (squares=CSG, rectangles=BREP)

CSG by itself isn't suitable for most CAD use-cases.

Creo (and Onshape) both support STEP AP242 export, but customers may choose to export to an older version for better compatibility with third-party systems that have not implemented recent standards.

Generally, at export time, choosing the oldest format version which still has all of the features you need will make it most likely others will be able to open the data.

I think there's a lot of potential for some more old-school UI in business software. People using points of sale, CRM/ERP/PLM/etc. systems, intranet portals, and so on don't really care about how nice it looks. Efficiency is more important.

Especially if it can be easy for non-technical people to build efficient UIs and databases (so they don't have to resort to spreadsheet contraptions), I think there's an opportunity here...

I've also felt that composition is unnecessarily hard in web & data infrastructure. I do game development as a hobby, and web + data technology is in the stone age compared to game engines when it comes to composability.

For example, say I develop some object (scene) in Godot Engine. It interacts with the environment using physics simulation, renders 3D graphics to the screen with some shaders and textures, and plays back audio from its 3D location.

I can send this scene to some other user of Godot, and it will naturally just work in their project, including colliding with their objects, rendering in their viewport (including lighting and effects), and the player will hear the location of the object spatially.

Of course there is much more you can do in Godot, too: network requests, event-driven updates, localization, cross-platform inputs, the list goes on. And all of these compose and scale in a manageable way as projects grow.

Plus the engine provides a common data and behavior backbone that makes it possible for a single project to have code in C++, C#, GDScript, and even other languages simultaneously (all of these languages talk with the engine, and the engine exposes state and behaviors to each language's APIs).

In fact, I've been thinking about making a Godot-inspired (or perhaps even powered) business application framework because it's just such a productive way of building complex logic and behavior in a way that is still easy to change and maintain.

So I imagine if Cambra can bring a similar level of composability for web & data software, it could dramatically improve the development speed and quality of complex applications.

You can just git submodule in the dependencies. Super easy. Also makes it straightforward to develop patches to send upstream from within your project. Or to replace a dependency with a private fork.

In my experience, this works great for libraries internal to an organization (UI components, custom file formats, API type definitions, etc.). I don't see why it wouldn't also work for managing public dependencies.

Plus it's ecosystem-agnostic. Git submodules work just as well for JS as they do for Go, sample data/binary assets, or whatever other dependencies you need to manage.