larschdk

There will surely be corresponding, different AI credit costs for each model.

On top of being worth less, the subscriber discounts are gone.

The old plans were $0.033/request for Pro, $0.026/request for Pro+ and $0.04/request for pay-as-you-go. That discount is now gone. They even still advertise "5x the number of requests" for Pro+ over Pro.

No surprise that a tool that can run shell scripts, open URLs, etc. is flagged down on Windows where AV try to detect such trojan methods.

An 125 kHz RFID reader would be a way simpler and cheaper solution. Could still have a 3D-printed box/slot.

Copyright law defines derivative work by substantial similarity and dependence, not by technical mechanisms like linking. Technical measures such as linking is not a copyright concept.

Dynamic linking is a condition for LGPL compliance, but it is not sufficient. Dynamic linking does not automatically prevent a combined work from being a derived work.

Here's a feature request: Disallow any and all unsolicited attention-seeking pop-ups or notifications from the browser itself.

Just checked debian/ubuntu/alpine/fedora/arch docker images. All are FULL by default.

The Office365 online and desktop implementations of zip could be different.

Rather one long function than does one thing well than multiple function that are strongly coupled and difficult to reason about. Programmers who apply dogmas can be harmful.

I think it is more expectation about expectation. You buy/sell based on whether you expect other people to expect earn or lose. It is self-referential, hence irrational. If a new play enters and peoples expectations shift, that affects your expectation of value even though the companies involved are not immediately or directly affects.

The source uses ○, not •, for the NAND operation.

Banknotes have serial numbers. Don't think that they are impossible to track.

When C was conceived, CPU architectures and platforms were more varied than what we see today. In order to remain portable and yet performant, some details were left as either implementation defined, or completely undefined (i.e. the responsibility of the programmer). Seems archaic today, but it was necessary when C compilers had to be two-pass and run in mere kilobytes of RAM. Even warnings for risky and undefined behavior is a relatively modern concept (last 10-20 years) compared to the age of C.

Does this prevent other software running on the same hardware from accessing the keychain?

E.g. on Windows, any program can access the entirety of the credential store for the current user.

Sure, if that is the only program, but it is not. This kind of thinking drains batteries faster than necessary, drains the cache, and reduces CPU efficiency. sleep() is a wasteful system call, a kludge at best, and is never the correct solution to a synchronization problem.