kyrias

Based on your phrasing it sounds like you think owning a national ID card is commonplace in Sweden. The national ID card system isn't widely used at all, most people use either their drivers license or passport when they need to identify themselves.

The only thing everyone has is a person number, and the difference is that it is explicitly considered public information and you can get anyone's person number by just asking the Tax Agency. It's just a convenient way to keep track of people, not a way to actually identify yourself.

The newer ones don't have the color coding anymore, they're all just black, and the always-on ones have an additional symbol under the SS<USB> symbol.

A lot of JavaScript things have been buggy for me with encrypted.google.com as well. For example the Google timer cards and such often just won't start at all, while they'll work fine on the regular google.com.

Nomad is mentioned in the article, so they hardly forgot about it.

> But having another XML dialect that's not actual XML…

HTML is based on SGML, it was never an XML dialect.

Non-conformant? PEP-394 says that scripts should only use python in the shebang if it's compatible with both py2 and py3, and be updated to work with both, or to use python2 otherwise.

virtualenv resolves the interpreter when you run virtualenv, and if you specify a different interpreter with `-p` it will resolve the path to the interpreter and then run virtualenv again using it.

> My main gripe with virtualenv is that it's required at all: other interpreted languages, like node and elixir for example, have figured out how to handle non-global dependencies without a third-party package.

venv is in the stdlib since 3.3. (Though I agree with the annoyance at the need.)

I agree with almost all of this, but...

> - you can't easily move virtualenvs;

`virtualenv --relocatable`, though it's weird that it's not the default, yes.

That would just follow a singular simple algorithm, not really intelligence in any sense.

And people not knowing how Git actually works is in my experience where most people's problems with Git stems from.

You really shouldn't call it “Apache <anything>” without the express approval of the Apache foundation. If you want to call it something other than “Modified Apache 2.0”, you'll have to come up with a new name.

Though what's interesting is that since the license text itself is not explicitly under any license, it's technically just under regular copyright.

You should have the backup codes stored somewhere more secure than your computer either way, quite possibly printed out.