uncle_j

> So how then do you know that Spain will veto a Scottish application to rejoin?

It is what I suspect after living in Spain as an Expat near Gibraltar for 3-4 years. I wasn't aware the official position has changed, however the Spanish Politics is all over the place especially after Vox (a Nationalist / Anti-Immigration party) did quite well in Andalusia.

> Have Spain produced a more up to date statement changing their position?

I think it is irrelevant and I qualified why in my previous post.

> If not, then are you not just spreading FUD?

It is simply a political opinion based on what I have observed after previously living there.

> edit: Also, Johnson shutting down the possibility of a second independence referendum is not the be all and end all: the Scottish government could pass legislation for one without a section 30, which would likely be challenged in court by the UK government. If the supreme court upholds the right for Scots to vote in a referendum, then it goes ahead.

Boris Johnson is going curtain the Supreme Courts interference with how the Commons work so I wouldn't count on that. If one is to believe David Starkey (who is a historian) he believes that the Supreme court shouldn't exist and is something invented by Tony Blair. Dominic Cummings is doing a shake up of the Civil Service. So I wouldn't count on any of that being relevant for too much longer.

The article is over 2 years old and Alfonso Dastis isn't the current foreign minister.

In any event Scottish Independence isn't going to happen anytime soon with Boris Johnson shutting down any possibility of an Indy Ref 2 last week.

> I don't understand why anyone still buys anything at Amazon.

It is cheaper than almost every other computer store in the UK for the same parts, deliver next day and they don't tend to shaft you on delivery cost (if it costs anything at all).

Unless you are near one of the large online shops and need something delivered next day there is no other option than Amazon.

That is more true of old x86 hardware and older micro-computers (Amigas, Ataris etc).

The SGI machines are difficult to get hold of in the UK to begin with plus they are as other said short supply. There is one Octane in the country and it is the machine only (even though the monitor and keyboard are pictured) and it is going for about £800 on ebay.

If it was everything I would have said "that probably the best deal I am going to get" and went for it.

It is a different story in the UK. I would probably just get one if I was in the US.

This reply is total buzzword salad.

> I've watched with great interest over time how Microsoft has evolved from closed source to open source. IMHO, Much of their motivation derives from huge demand from the community to open source their software.

I am not a Microsoft hater but that is half true. The fact of the matter is that in 2010-2012ish their tech stack basically wasn't cool anymore and back then if you had cut me I would have bled Microsoft blue. The fact of the matter is that newest Juniors don't like working with the old Microsoft stack. Outside of .NET core everything release (including the newer versions of Visual Studio since 2010) hasn't really been adopted.

> Developers benefit in several ways by being able to quickly fix bugs, possibility (depends on project) of adding a feature, and desire to contribute to the community on software they like.

Is this a copy and paste answer of the "benefits of open source"?

The point I was making was that these huge companies (all of the large companies) have taken open source software and put most of the useful bits to tie it all together and put it behind pay walls (PaaS).

If a patch or a set of patches is not in <insert big companies interest> it probably won't be allowed in the project. Forks of these projects generally die because there isn't a dedicated resource unlike <insert large company can provide>.

> There has also been several products that Microsoft has decided to stop providing, but have lived on through community adoption, which is huge if developers have dedicated their own time to learn and integrate the software with their own projects over time.

Which ones? Almost everything that isn't officially in the Microsoft repos for the most part is dead. The few things that are .NET that have survived are quite small tbh.

> Open source also gives developers a say in the development of products, watching it being built in the open, influencing direction/features, and making it easier to understand what the code does under the hood. Additionally, Microsoft has embraced and supported 3rd party open source for a number of years, building on their relationship with the community.

Gives how much of a say. Not much I would reckon.

Been wanting one of these machines for years, but they are sooo pricey it is insane. Mainline Linux support will be good, but I tbh I would be running IRIX as intended.

Most of the CO2 is produced in China and India so I doubt the conversation in the USA will be even relevant.

I would like to know Why I should contribute to Open Source when Microsoft is a massive company that has plenty of resources to fix its own bugs.

Sure if you are at Uni, Just starting out or something that not likely to be commercial (console emulator, hobbyist projects etc) it might be a good way to get some experience and something to put on the CV. Otherwise you are just giving your hard work away for free to companies that have plenty of money to to put plenty of developers to work on it.

I am from the UK. But the last movie I watched in the Cinema was in 2014. It is expensive and unnecessary. I bought in the new year a 60inch 4k HDR TV for less than £400 from toshiba.

Why would you bother when you can get a similar experience at home without the hassle?

I've been doing .NET dev for the last decade. I have no idea how to get the whole browser part of the toolchain working with Visual Studio. I just don't bother. The client side debugging is done with a browser that is basically Chrome (Brave these days). You can set up everything to go through VS but there I don't see any benefit in doing so.

That is interesting.

I assumed that innerHTML must have been wrong because textContent works in all the browsers I have tried it on whereas innerHTML doesn't work. A cursory search textContent vs innerHTML seemed to suggest textContent was the correct way.

It looks like it isn't a simple case of IE11 (I haven't had a chance to test on 9 & 10 yet) being correct and the others being incorrect. Thanks for the info.

This is a shame in some ways. Internet explorer was always very strict on how it works.

Anything before 8 was a challenge due to some atrocious bugs.

This had it problems but it really taught you not to write sloppy CSS and JS as it would usually just wouldn't work.

Versions After 7 basically anything that wasn't in the spec supported wasn't implemented so you had to write code pretty much bang on the spec.

Just this Friday I solved a rendering problem with IE where SVG TEXT elements weren't being rendered correctly, I was calling element.innerHTML to set the text which was incorrect. I should have been element.textContent. Using element.innerHTML is incorrect as SVG elements shouldn't have a innerHTML property (they are not HTML). IE11 was actually working correctly, where the latest Chrome behaviour was incorrect.

So spending time making it work in IE has improved my code.