Thunderbird had a redesign not too long ago. I mean, maybe you still consider it old-fashioned, but did you check you’re on the latest version?

This shit is the reason I love going online sometimes.

Nun enthält das neue StVG mehr als das Ziel, Pkw flüssig durch den Verkehr zu bringen. Projekte dürfen auch der Gesundheit, dem Klimaschutz oder der sogenannten städtebaulichen Entwicklung dienen, diese Ziele sind fest im Gesetz verankert.

Bin davon ausgegangen, dass da nicht wortwörtlich “PKW = Vorfahrt” drinsteht, aber wollte trotzdem wissen, was da drinsteht.

Wissen tue ich das immer noch nicht, weil da nämlich verdammt viel drinsteht. Anscheinend befasst sich damit primär StVG §6.

Aber angesichts dessen, dass da verdammt viel drinsteht, gehe ich noch mehr davon aus, dass da wirklich nicht nur “PKW = Vorfahrt” steht. 🫠

Our brains cannot store all the experiences we ever make. It rather only stores ‘hunches’ (via many weightings of neurons). In particular, it also mixes multiple experiences together to reinforce such hunches.

This means that despite there being causal reasons why you might e.g. feel uneasy around big dogs, your brain will likely only reproduce a hunch, a gut feeling of fear.

And then because you don’t remember the concrete causal reasons, it feels like a decision to follow your hunch to get the hell out of there.
This feeling of making a decision is made even stronger, because there isn’t just the big-dog-bad-hunch, but also the don’t-show-fear-to-big-dog-hunch and the I’m-in-a-social-situation-and-it-would-be-rude-to-leave-hunch and many others.

There is just an insane amount of past experiences and present sensory input, which makes it impossible to trace back why you would decide a certain way. This gives the illusion of there being no reasons, of free will.

I thought so, too. I’m finding news that a closure was strongly suspected, but it wasn’t yet confirmed.

German source: https://www.derstandard.at/story/3000000203604/piranha-bytes-das-studio-hinter-gothic-steht-vor-der-schliessung

Yeah, the reason why people deride it, is because it’s practically equivalent to:

div style="flex: 1; gap: 2em; margin-top: 3em; margin-bottom: 3em; ..."

I had to look up what these do, so they might not be precisely correct translations, but hopefully, you get the idea. It’s mostly like using inline styles, and like not using classes.

In some scenarios, these frameworks might simplify certain things, like how my applies two CSS rules. And they reduce the visual clutter of inline styling somewhat.

But overall, it feels like people are dissatisfied with semantic classes, but don’t want to lead the discussion for using inline styles, so they grab these CSS frameworks to pretend that they’re not using inline styles.

It is fundamentally a difficult discussion to lead, because inline styles feel great, while you’re writing them. They’re less great for maintenance.
But semantic classes definitely have long-term problems, too.

To be honest, I’m a bit unsure about the name in English. Here in Germany, it sells as “Erdnussmus”, which is verbatim “peanut mush”. Well, and that’s also quite a good description of it, it is literally just pureed peanuts. As in, there is only 1 ingredient in it.

Wikipedia lists “natural peanut butter”, which sounds roughly correct: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peanut_butter#Types
But stores seem to also sell sweetened peanut butter as “natural”…

But yeah, basically unsweetened non-crunchy peanut butter, but also without the other stuff they tend to throw in there. Maybe it also works well with that other stuff, I haven’t actually tried…

Oh yeah, it definitely is in that sense. The point is that patriotism is hard to discern from facism. That they happened to use the same symbol here is just a good illustration of that. Ultimately, the Hitler Salute also started out as a symbol of patriotism before it all turned to genocide.

heliocentricism → the Sun is the center of the universe solar system and all revolves around it

That’s what you meant to write…

I haven’t found much of a convincing explanation, but here’s the OSI meeting notes from when it was approved:

[…] Matt Flaschen believes it complies with the OSD. The chief concern is that you can’t sell the fonts as fonts — you can only redistribute them as data included with a program. Seems like a restriction, but that’s what we’ve had on the Bitstream fonts for three or four years now and nobody seems to complain about them. Recommend: Approval

Source: https://opensource.org/meeting-minutes/minutes20090401

And I’m guessing, this is one of the Bitstream fonts that they’re talking about: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitstream_Vera#Licensing_and_expansion

Certainly seems a bit at odds with the OSD to me:

1. Free Redistribution

The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.

Source: https://opensource.org/osd

I kind of agree that I don’t care as much. There’s not as much need for modifying a font, because it fundamentally cannot do as much as a program. And if a modification becomes necessary, that’s not going to need as much budget, so there’s not as much need for being allowed to sell it.

But at the same time, it’s not like the OSI is the judge over good vs. bad. Certainly would like to know Matt Flaschen’s thoughts why this fits the OSD…