looking at files inside the temp folder … otherwise known as … are you sitting down? You really should sit for this … temp files!

The point OP is making is that those people would not put 2 and 2 together to understand that the files they were looking at are called temp files, just because that’s the folder they found them in. They may not even remember the name of the folder, only that it contains a bunch of files with a prefix they’re now googling.

Not sure why I’m bothering explaining this to you, the way you responded makes you look absolutely insufferable, but maybe someone else who comes across this will find it useful.

Asking someone their country of residence is privacy intruding? Lol

I am from Germany

If you were really from Germany, you’d never have given that much personal information up voluntarily!

I’m mostly just glad to be in a country where it is more socially acceptable to be direct. I would be a bit more formal than the original email, but the rewritten version seems really watered down and tip-toed in comparison.

I think that is changing through ChatGPT and the likes though, even it’s non-English output has a distinct American tone to it that I’m starting to see more in professional emails. I have seen too many literal translations of “I hope this message finds you well” already, it’s kinda ridiculous

Ok, I like this description a lot actually, it’s a very quick and effective way to explain the effects of no backtracking. A lot of the answers here are either too reductive or too technical to actually make this behavior understandable to a layman. “It just predicts the next word” is easy to forget when the thing makes it so easy to be anthropomorphized subconsciously.

I usually like this creator, but he conflated multiple unrelated issues in the video and also made too much of a point out of his own experience of not knowing what to do. This isn’t really a video on vision pro as it is on various aspects of the modern internet

It will happen, probably in weeks to months.

in the next few years, like, very few

Now who’s moving the goalposts…?

While at the same time closing all PRs indiscriminately, even the ones that are just trying to update the repo from its decades old JavaScript syntax (and get support in the comments)

Here in Germany everyone I know pronounces the letters individually – as German letters that is, which means the Q is pronounced “coo” rather than “cue”. I don’t mind it, it’s not quite as clunky as in English.

I do say sequel when speaking English though.

That isn’t what they asked! They asked about when it is tolerable to use fewer digits and at what point the loss of precision becomes a concern again. Your responses have nothing to do with that question.

There’s no authority that would use a higher number of decimals

Cool, but that still doesn’t answer OP’s question.

The link you provided doesn’t even answer the question because it only tells you what NASA uses and then what would happen if you used no decimals at all. So your answer is not only rude, but also lazy and unhelpful.

The community is called “No Stupid Questions”, maybe you could adjust the tone of your answer accordingly.

Like when Covid lockdowns were causing shortages and every right winger said “this is what life under socialism would look like” without a hint of irony

When any message with some contents is received - Right now this is limited to a list of contacts. I’d like to have a shortcut where someone could text me, “Where are you?” and it’ll just auto-send my location.

You can already do this! Just leave the Sender field on “Choose” and fill out the Message Contains field only.

There is an organization called nyob (I think) pushing back against that and going through the courts to have more sites penalized for their violations. The process is slow, but I see more and more pages adopting the required “reject all” so there seems to be some pressure on them.

Where did I say it takes years? I literally said earlier in my response to your very first comment that I think 2 days vs a week can make a big difference in understanding.

Stop arguing against points I never made.

Please point me to where I said that then. Given that my stance is just that it’s not very plausible, I would be very interested to see where I supposedly claimed it wasn’t possible.

How are you saying you “straight up disagree” and then you go on to agree with me that for someone without exceptional experience, 5-6 days is reasonable?

I think there’s a pretty significant difference between a week and 2 days in terms of how much time you had to solidify your understanding.

I also didn’t take that long to pick up the basics, but I could not say that I understood hooks within the first two days of working with React. There are just so many small details and limitations that can catch you by surprise if you don’t know why hooks work the way they do, same with the lifecycle of a component and what triggers a re-render. That does take a few days to fully understand in a way that you can utilize moving forward.

It’s possible that I had a harder time because I was used to manipulating the DOM directly, and so managing all updates through state changes and being strongly discouraged from directly referencing UI elements felt very foreign to me. I don’t think that my stance would change if I had a different experience in the beginning though.

Glossing over the pretentiousness of your comment

And your stance of “I can learn x in two days, so how can people say it takes longer to learn y” isn’t pretentious?

When do you consider someone’s “mental model” “appropriate”?

“appropriate” isn’t a quantification of the mental model in itself, I am using the word as “having a mental model that is appropriate to the thing being learned”. A different mental model is required for React than working with vanilla JS and manipulating the DOM directly, so the mental model for one isn’t appropriate for the other.

And yes, a mental model is quantifiable, to the extent that it accurately predicts what consequences design and implementation decisions may have on the behavior of the system.