> You can have multiples tabs in different containers in a single window.
I literally want the _opposite_ of that. Chrome makes it so that a Window is specific to a profile. Makes it very simple to keep say Work and Home profiles separate, for example. Especially if you set color schemes for each window.
I wanted a no-nonsense single-binary alternative to pi-hole (based on CoreDNS).
Been using this as my home DNS server for a year now without issue. Recently added support for reading a directory of block lists, so now it's easy to keep things organized in blocking sites with huge numbers of domains.
Gnome Wayland, unless I made a mistake somewhere. It’s so random it’s difficult to determine more than “the desktop stutters sometimes especially when opening the overview.” I was having issues with my 5700g iGPU with 2x4K monitors as well - that required a kernel patch to fix.
Kind of disappointed an Intel NUC from 2015 handled the displays better.
I bought it, but I bought it as a donation towards funding R&D in the space of autonomous driving. I’ve found FSD useless outside of highway driving, which adaptive cruise control does ok at. That has however changed in the last year and the FSD has improved dramatically over months to the point I can reasonably navigate door to door in a hostile and negligently adversarial driving environment like seattle without fear of imminent death. If I were evaluating it on “what could I have materially attained for the price of FSD” I don’t think I got a good deal. But again, I didn’t spend the money with that in mind. I bought it with the idea that $3b in consumer crowd funding of FSD will materially advance the end of human intermediated driving - which I think is akin to curing cancer.
I marvel that there are people who thought donating to the richest man in the world (or one of the richest men at the time) would result in something other than him just taking your money.
It's a backwards-looking explanation though in this instance, and so subject to explanations and recollections which frame the purchaser as not having been fooled but rather <something more noble>.
Not to say I live inside parent's head or anything of that sort, and they could be accurately remembering their intention and expectations at the time, but if I had to bet?
Elon Musk doesn’t receive all revenues from Tesla, nor does he personally own it. Money spent on a Tesla primarily goes into operating expenses. Money earned by Elon primarily comes from shareholders bidding up the value of his equity.
Also, typically in any company revenue and PNL is attributed to the feature accumulating it and investment follows. It seems like a fairly rational bet.
I think it heavily depends on when they bought it given the increase in pricing.
I bought it at $7k, knowing full well that I’d never likely see true FSD, but the features it added were worth it to me like navigation on autopilot, and lane changes on the highway. We figured that just those two were enough to spring for it, given we commuted a lot and did road trips a lot. So it was nice to have it take over every once in a while.
At $7k, it was pricey but not very out of line with other car companies upgrade packages.
I think the ROI really depends therefore on what price point it was got at (someone who got it at $3k probably likes it a lot more than someone who spent 10k), and what they were expecting out of it.
I think true FSD is a smoke and mirrors trick that Tesla will not achieve with their current sensor loadout.
That's the FAQ. The official Language Specification says nothing about this little gimmick, at least in the if-else section: https://go.dev/ref/spec#If_statements
You'd think one would want to look for it in that instead of an FAQ page.
If you looked at the spec which provides simple, valid examples that work, then why would you spend hours writing different code wondering why it doesn’t work?
All of this is quite natural once you use the language. in fact, it was designed this way in response to the way it was being used.
It is not appropriate for the spec to constantly reiterate concepts that have already been introduced, but rather it should precisely define each concept once. If you want to learn a language from its spec then it behooves you to consider the document as a whole. That requires a lot of mental overhead and I think most people are better off learning from examples and tutorials rather than reading a language spec.
To someone coming from C, C++, or Java, the idea that a newline would change the meaning is completely novel. And Go has the same "flavor" as those languages, so most people would expect Go to behave the same unless the difference were called out very explicitly.
