It really is in the writing and not the referencing 95% of the time. That's why I tend to hand-write my notes. If it 's something I think I should have for reference, I'll transcribe, bookmark a reference, or something.
I swear the android autocorrect got so much worse at some point. Somewhere between 5 and 15 years ago. I used to be able to type vaguely coherent sentences and all of the typos would magically become the words I meant, even if they didn't look right. Now I frequently type completely correct sentences and the correctly spelled words get changed into other words that make no sense in context.
And i used to be able to backspace the wrong word and fix it and it would learn thats what I meant. Now if I try that, it'll frequently keep trying to edit to the word I didn't mean unless I press the little checkmark in the autocorrect panel. Just annoying UX.
I remember when I could blindly type because autocorrect was so good. I've been enjoying FUTO keyboard a bit, but I dont yet know if it's the same experience.
Bit of an aside, but I just checked them out and TIL that Immich (which I use as my primary photos solution) is also a FUTO product (the website says "powered by FUTO").
SwiftKey has this one where you can erase the wrong word and try to correct it, and it instead adds two words: the one you erased and the second attempt after it.
Not the first time I hear of this, but I thought it was a blink-specific issue when using severely nested structures (e.g., html pages written using visual editors like Elementor or Webflow)?
For quite a while, I had to keep using flexbox instead of grids, because grids killed performance, funnily enough.
That seems to have been rectified with modern browsers though, funnily enough.
Browser performance tips from 2014 mean very little twelve years on. Not only have machines gotten faster and networks gotten faster, rendering engines gotten faster. And I'm doubtful it nested flexboxes would've been all that much of a problem in most cases even then.
The most important thing is to use the right tool for the job. If grid lets you express what you want in the most straightforward way, use it; if flexbox does - even if it needs nesting - then use it instead. Don't shoehorn one into a situation where the other makes more sense. And sometimes either will work for a particular situation and that's fine too; use whatever you find most ergonomic. They're both very good in their own way.
The article is largely about layout shifts caused by flexbox during loading, and while networks have indeed gotten faster, they haven’t gotten faster uniformly across situations and people. Being able to show things properly while they are still downloading remains useful.
Flexbox is great and having nested flexboxes is also great. It makes building responsive pages a bliss. Learn it if you are having trouble with it, it is really not that difficult. Grids are much more error prone and allow for much less flexibility.
Even for layout, CSS took a long time to catch up with tables in some areas. Tables were not designed for layout, but there's a lot of aspects to them which are easier to grasp and work with than trying to get the same effect with early CSS.
Pricing tiers are a form of dynamic pricing. Service free tiers basically couldn't exist without dynamic pricing, as they are subsidized by the paying tiers.
reply