[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 65 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

The reason is that you're reading TeX, not LaTeX. The latter has abstracted away the fundamental building blocks so few people know how an hbox is set anymore. So, an hbox is a box where the content is in horizontal mode. Between the things is glue. Glue can stretch and shrink. Depending on how you have set your tolerance and penalties, there's a maximum percentage of stretch allowed. If the glue stretches more, it becomes bad, this is called badness and can effectively be up to 10000 bad. So why not just put more things into the box? Well, (La)TeX probably tried to do that, but came up with worse badness. TeX always chooses the least bad option on a paragraph level. In practice, the usual suspect is often that you have something else that can't fit the last part of a line, like a really long word. If you can look at it and manually hyphenate it, things might be better.

29
submitted 3 months ago by pmk@lemmy.sdf.org to c/linux@lemmy.ml

A video from openSUSE Conference 2024 about using distrobox on openSUSE Aeon.

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 123 points 3 months ago

The author of JSLint wrote:
"So I added one more line to my license, was that, "the Software shall be used for Good, not Evil." And thought: I've done my job!
/.../
Also about once a year, I get a letter from a lawyer, every year a different lawyer, at a company. I don't want to embarrass the company by saying their name, so I'll just say their initials, "IBM," saying that they want to use something that I wrote, 'cause I put this on everything I write now. They want to use something that I wrote and something that they wrote and they're pretty sure they weren't gonna use it for evil, but they couldn't say for sure about their customers. So, could I give them a special license for that?

So, of course!

So I wrote back---this happened literally two weeks ago---I said, "I give permission to IBM, its customers, partners, and minions, to use JSLint for evil." "

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 180 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

People seem to think that those who choose permissive licences don't know what they're doing. Software can be a gift to the world with no strings attached. A company "taking" your code is never taking it away from you, you still have all the code you wrote. Some people want this. MIT is not an incomplete GPL, it has its own reasons.

For example, OpenBSD has as a project goal: "We want to make available source code that anyone can use for ANY PURPOSE, with no restrictions. We strive to make our software robust and secure, and encourage companies to use whichever pieces they want to."

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 47 points 4 months ago

I have actually never felt entitled to these things. What I mostly feel is a responsibility. If something breaks I'm supposed to know how to fix it. Because of this I have become good at fixing things. If we are lost I'm supposed to find where we are, so I study maps before I go somewhere new. If a decision needs to be made, again, eyes turn to me, so I need to know a little about everything, and never look indecisive. If an unexpected expense comes up, I need to have money saved away for this purpose. The punishment for failing things like this is not disapproval from other men or feeling less masculine. The punishment is that I'm viewed as less by my girlfriend. This is how I think things go hand in hand. By helping women get empowered, we can share responsibilities. By women helping us feel valued for ourselves, worthy of love, desired as we are, we don't need to constantly fear being seen as less... then, I don't know. Maybe it would also lead to men feeling safer to be better human beings. The impossible dilemma now, for me, is that I'm still expected to be successful in the traditionally masculine things, while at the same time not being successful in the traditionally masculine things. No way to win.

141
About the bear... (lemmy.sdf.org)
submitted 5 months ago by pmk@lemmy.sdf.org to c/mensliberation@lemmy.ca

So, I'm just assuming we've all seen the discussions about the bear.
Personally I feel that this is an opportunity for everyone to stop and think a little about it. The knee-jerk reaction from many men seems to be something along the lines of "You would choose a dangerous animal over me? That makes me feel bad about myself." which results in endless comments of the "Akchully... according to Bayes theorem you are much more likely to..." kind.
It should be clear by now that it doesn't lead to good places.
Maybe, and I'm open to being wrong, but maybe the real message is women saying: "We are scared of unknown men."
Then, if that is the message intended, what do we do next? Maybe the best thing is just to listen. To ask questions. What have you experienced to make you feel that way?
I firmly believe that the empathy we give lays a foundation for other people being willing to have empathy for the things we try to communicate.
It doesn't mean we should feel bad about ourselves, but just to recognize that someone is trying to say something, and it's not a technical discussion about bears.
What do you think?

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 55 points 5 months ago

Consider this: when you speak the listeners know what you mean based on the rest of the sentence. When you write you give the reader the intended word through spelling. People who read will see your words and assume you really meant "then" instead of "than", and the sentence will make little sense.
The words "I" and "eye" sound similar, but if you write "eye" I will read a sentence first thinking you are trying to say something about an eye, then when it breaks down, go back and find the issue. End that my friend is less then eye-deal for comprehension.

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 51 points 5 months ago

To increase their UNIX skills.

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 37 points 5 months ago

To be fair, iirc, macOS is certified UNIX despite having the XNU kernel which stands for X is Not UNIX.

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 46 points 5 months ago

It's easy to fall into motte-and-bailey reasoning though. The motte is an easily defended simple thing most people agree with. The bailey is a controversial thing you want to advance. If the bailey is debated, you can retreat into the motte and make claims that it's simple and uncontroversial. Most ideologies or systems of thought have a core that many people agree with, and then that's taken as approval of all its extrapolations. For example, do you believe that people should be able to decide what they use their money for? Well, then you must agree with laissez-faire neo-liberalism. Do you want children to be safe online? Then you agree that the government should inspect all your communication. Do you want everyone to be equal? Then you must agree with everything the soviet union did.

With feminism, it's easy to defend the core ideas, but it also encompasses implementations like affirmative action which not everyone agrees with, and practices that are not about dismantling hierarchies but rather just "wanting a better seat at the table of tyranny", to quote White Lotus.

On a personal level, I work in a female dominated workplace, where women hold all the positions of power. There's a lot of remarks and actions that would absolutely not be ok if the genders were reversed. A constant flow of explanations why men are stupid, sexualizing male workers, "playful" sexual harassment, ridiculing men etc. Many of them are self-proclaimed feminists. And it's cheered on and praised as a form of "girl power". If you ask me to identify as a feminist, these are the people I think of.

I have struggled a lot with setting boundaries and not letting myself be taken advantage of, so I'm very reluctant to be a part of something that requires self-flagellation over which group of people I belong to. I agree with the core of feminism, but to call myself a feminist I'd like my voice to be as welcome as a womans voice, which is rarely the case in my experience.

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 46 points 5 months ago

The ice sheet covering northern europe started to melt away, and with that we got what is called "glacial erratics". Rocks had traveled from once place to another, and then settled. In Sweden we call those "giants throw", because it was assumed that the only way those big rocks could be where they are was if a giant had thrown it.

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 57 points 5 months ago

I wanted to try inserting and removing kernel modules, so I looked around and thought "well, I don't have a USB stick in right now so I can safely try removing the usb kernel module." So I did that, and after pressing enter I realized my keyboard is connected with USB.

214
submitted 6 months ago by pmk@lemmy.sdf.org to c/linux@lemmy.ml

For example, I'm using Debian, and I think we could learn a thing or two from Mint about how to make it "friendlier" for new users. I often see Mint recommended to new users, but rarely Debian, which has a goal to be "the universal operating system".
I also think we could learn website design from.. looks at notes ..everyone else.

97
Oxytocin (lemmy.sdf.org)

I made this during a time I felt very lonely. Now I don't feel lonely anymore, I feel great (for reasons unrelated to crafting, but still).

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 51 points 9 months ago

Similarly, the viking rune "alphabet" is called the Futhark, because the first letters are pronounced F, U, Þ, A, R, K.

258
The future of Linux (lemmy.sdf.org)
submitted 11 months ago by pmk@lemmy.sdf.org to c/linux@lemmy.ml

I'm not proposing anything here, I'm curious what you all think of the future.

What is your vision for what you want Linux to be?

I often read about wanting a smooth desktop experience like on MacOS, or having all the hardware and applications supported like Windows, or the convenience of Google products (mail, cloud storage, docs), etc.

A few years ago people were talking about convergence of phone/desktop, i.e. you plug your phone into a big screen and keyboard and it's now your desktop computer. That's one vision. ChromeOS has its "everything is in the cloud" vision. Stallman has his vision where no matter what it is, the most important part is that it's free software.

If you could decide the future of personal computing, what would it be?

[-] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 73 points 11 months ago

There's also PonyOS (https://www.ponyos.org/) They wrote their own kernel, so it's not Linux, but it is Unix-like.

view more: next ›

pmk

joined 1 year ago