tichiian

Not really, at least not in Windows. There are no cross-application macros in Windows, just intra-application ones, and that only for some applications.

It is a little better on MacOS with AppleScript, which can be used to bind different applications together. But not all of them, and it is far from ideal.

In the end, nothing of this is command-line equivalent.

Btw, if you want to see a GUI application that can do really really good macros, learn Blender! E.g. you can bind any button and knob to keyframes to change them in animations. That would be the level of macro-integration required to be CLI-like...

I've gotten surprised gasps for the use of etckeeper.

"you can actually do that?" "why didn't anyone tell me?" etc.

Land registry in Germany is per city/town/municipality. Since land doesn't really move, it is always registered in the municipality where it is located. All titles, mortgages, owners and weirdnesses (local shepherd having the right to graze his sheep on your land) are registered locally. Downside is that e.g. taking a mortgage on your house incurs the additional cost of recording the mortgage in the land registry and removing the record after the mortgage is paid.

PS: Are those tiny, cheap, desktop laser engravers powerful enough to "print" on paper without starting a fire?

Yes, you can modulate their power. It usually takes a few experiments if the manual doesn't have a material table.

Not sure where the actual limit is or if they changed it, I also don't have any hard sources, just heresay that there is "no limit". But there are 20 buildings over 150m, and 6 over 200m, so it probably is or was quite a bit above 100m.

And if it is due to the usual fire brigade ladder height problem, that would be at most 68m currently: https://www.magirusgroup.com/de/en/products/turntable-ladder... (around here in a smaller town, a company got a 50m building permit when they paid for the new fire truck with a sufficiently long ladder).

The other answers around here are mostly right, but I'd like to add another one, which is right in some situations:

Message queues are often the wrong tool. Often you rather want something like RPC, and message queues were wrongly used as poor man's async DIY RPC.

I'd guess apple would invent some "made for iCrap" certification plus parts authentication to keep prices up and skim off some money for themselves.

While zoning in Germany almost universally sets the limit at the height of the local church (yes, really...), the actual reasons are building codes. Even cities that permit arbitrary height (famously Frankfurt am Main) still don't have that many high buildings: Because somewhere around the 5 to 7 story line, you run into really expensive requirements around additional rescue staircases with overpressure ventilation, roof access, rescue balconies and stuff like that.

Only direct elections are democratic. Everything else is at best semi-democratic.

Locking someone up is a one-way punishment, they will not get their years back. Branding someone as a child-molester, even if they are later vindicated, is permanent. We already have irreversible punishments.

Excel implementers struggle with it.

Half the features of Excel cannot deal with named cells. Try for example to use named cells in Conditional Formatting. Doesn't work at all, ranges cannot be named cells or tables, and condition formulas can only reference named cells with extremely ugly contortions.

There are lots and lots of additional examples of similar problems.

Excel is a loose agglomeration of unrelated features hidden under a pretty GUI.

We don't need a subset of HTML. Actually, we need Markdown emails. You can format stuff that needs structure, but not abusively so (no blinking marquee banners in eyesore colors), it is sufficiently compatible to plaintext that you don't even need the text alternative mime object. It is also more compact than HTML.

And before somebody says "won't fly", all those fancy new "will replace email someday" messengers use markdown or some parts of it's formatting.

Berlin is also trying to improve it's standard of living, social structure, economic outlook and overall cleanliness. Graffiti vandalism will have less and less of a place there, and have a lessening acceptance.

Basically, in my ideal world, whoever builds an ugly enough building should be liable to remove it or improve it if it is deemed too ugly by a majority.

Graffiti is (partially) just the consequence of not living in that ideal world, but because of all the other problems with graffiti, I'd rather just treat it as the vandalism it usually is in all cases. No sense holding an election before every prosecution or clean and paint job.

Also, the noise pollution regulations that are in place exempt trains.

I think the reason DB introduces this kind of measures over the obviously superior first steps like "building a quieter train" is this: Walls are paid for by the state or community annoyed by the train noise. New or improved trains would be paid for by DB (a nominally private company).

Which is why stuff like "putting quieter brakes on freight trains that don't sound like fingernails on a chalk board" will take at least 20 more years if it will happen at all.

An ugly beton brut building defaces the landscape and the view that should belong to everyone. A beautiful graffiti can improve that view and landscape. Under those circumstances, a graffiti can be legally wrong but morally right.

However only very few graffiti "artists" rise above the skill level where their work could be considered beautiful. Usually it's just plain old dick measuring contests like spraying political slogans and overspraying the opposition's, putting your name on as many places as possible or proving their "worth" in the danger of getting caught, with no aesthetically relevant outcome whatsoever.

Since you can’t sue an airline, there’s little anyone can do except complaint to the Department of Transportation.

I think this is the really big WTF here: Why the hell can't you sue an airline? How did that become law, and why wasn't it overturned as clearly unconstitutional?

OneDrive sync and "rock-solid" in the same sentence? I beg to differ.

Frequent conflicts due to non-synced files, the client crashing, randomly failing auth, files that are indicated to be recent and in sync but really aren't, no proper debuggability, no insight into why things don't work if they (frequently) don't. I could go on. OneDrive is a very bad thing to reference in this context.

Now this starts to sound like ClearCase. (me shuddering in disgust)

irrelevant for a VCS (cloud-native?!)

Disagree. "cloud-native" to me sounds offputting. One of the main selling points for me of git over the likes of SVN is the capability to work offline, in restricted networks and through non-http transports like mail.

You are right in that the world would be a better place with more useful and actionable error messages.

But:

How is it not obvious to the point of pain that you need to know WHY something failed, not only that it failed?

This is obvious to everyone, at least after encountering the first few errors. But that makes it the perfect thing to upsell, to milk your existing customers with a pricier plan. One instance is e.g. Microsoft selling access to their customers' logs to those same customers: https://www.theregister.com/2023/07/20/under_cisa_spressures... (they backpedalled after it blew up spectacularly).

No, I don't like it. Yes, I hate those Ferengi. Changing how things are for the better not only requires recognizing the immediate problems but also why the problem is persisted, and who is to blame for it.

There are reasons for not reporting detailed errors to the user.

For websites, security is a big one. Detailed error messages can lead to information exfiltration, exploits, fingerprinting and generally bad things. Long error messages in some network protocols enable amplification attacks.

For general applications, there are commercial reasons. You don't want to enable your users too much, they should be incentivized to buy your pricey platinum premium package after all. Therefore an opaque error message, maybe with some error code but no text and no information, is necessary: The user will need to call support and get the error code decoded and be told in hour-long, tedious and expensive support calls how to fix the error. Actually actionable errors are what makes your company go bankcrupt, especially if you do freemium or OSS+support business models.

This is missing the fact that the stainless steel from the ultra-durable umbrella is also easy to recycle. In fact, steel is far easier to recycle than any kind of plastic.

Also, the whole work seems to skip over the huge problem of insufficient customer information: There is a remark in there, that lots of people (about half) seem to choose the ultra-durable umbrella, rather than one of the less resource-intensive ones. The reason for this imho isn't that people don't care about the resources. It is rather that everyone has been conditioned to assume that products are crappier than specified. People do not and usually can not know how durable each product they are offered will be. And buying something ultra-durable-seeming at least gives you a chance at a decent product lifetime. All the rest is usually crappier than expected.

One reason is that the environmentally friendlier alternatives are often also materials of lesser quality. E.g. recycled plastic degrades and is more brittle than "fresh".

The other reason is greedy manufacturers, saving on necessary materials, making products less durable. And maybe intentionally building in weak points, limiting lifetime to sell more stuff.

Yes. But many parts of excel don't support those. E.g. conditional formatting just doesn't deal with names.

Also, when you need names, it is a sign to reach for a proper programming enviroment like Delphi or Lazarus.

Python is a bad language for this, because one-liners are awkward. Multiline code is possible but ugly due to indentation-based syntax. Brace-based languages would be far more suitable here.

That A1 mode is Excel "Baby-Mode", you can switch to R1C1 mode in settings. Things are far easier then, and more sane.

His Excel-lence also recommends this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxBg4sMusIg

No. The key listed is the whole plain ed25519 pubkey (those are relatively short). The message displays the SHA256 digest.

You can check that in your local known_hosts file (after having connected at least once) with "ssh-keygen -F terminal.shop -l" and "ssh-keygen -F terminal.shop -lv". (Yes, it is confusing that the command is named "ssh-keygen" but does lots of things that are not about generating any keys)

If you want to do it without connecting, try "ssh-keyscan terminal.shop".

Sorry, English is not my native language. I know I sometimes sound strange because most of my use of the language is around the internet and at work, not that much casual "normal" conversation.

What can also help is specifying the right options right in ~/.ssh/config for certain hosts and domains: E.g. do "ForwardAgent no" globally, use a "Match *.my-trustworthy-company-domain.com" block and add "ForwardAgent yes" there.

Also very good for other options that are useful but problematic when used with untrustworthy target hosts, like ForwardX11, GSSAPIAuthentication, weaker *Algorithms (e.g. for those old Cisco boxes with no updates and similar crap).

Another neat trick is just using a ""Match *.my-trustworthy-company-domain.com" block" with an "IdentityFile ~/.ssh/secret-company-internal-key" directive. That key will then be used for those company-internal things, but not for any others, if you don't add it to the agent.