Being "fungible" means that something is functionally equivalent with something else.

For example even though every dollar bill is unique (they have unique serial numbers), they are all fungible. If you deposit $100 in the bank, then withdraw $100 later, you are not getting the same bills, maybe not even the same denominations, but you don't care because it doesn't matter.

In the digital world copies are cheap and perfect. There is literally no way to tell a copy of an image from "the original". So in the digital world all copies of something are fungible, and originals don't meaningfully exist.

NFTs try to introduce artificial scarcity to the digital space by creating a distinction between "the original" of something and the copies, by introducing a sort of chain of custody tracking system.

Many years ago. But as you said, it's a big industry, and the US is not an easy place to unionize in.

I've yet to see any that are of any use.

A pet peeve of mine is documentation that describes how the code works. If I want to know that, I can just read it (perhaps assisted by an IDE or debugger).*

What I need documented is why the code works like that. How is it intended to be used? What quirks and gotchas are there?

*If the code is not readable it needs to be refactored, not documented.

Seems suspicious. There probably is such an option hidden somewhere. Because whenever you get a clear answer there, it's invariably wrong.

Yes, the sanctions against Russia, as mentioned by Linus. The change also said the maintainers "can come back in the future if sufficient documentation is provided".

My guess is that the Linux Foundation must ensure that none of the people they work with are in any way associated with any organisation, person or activity on the sanctions list. And that they preemptively removed all maintainers that might risk violating the sanctions while they work with them to establish whether they might be covered by the sanctions or not.

Regardless of what you or they think of the sanctions, they are the law, and I don't think anyone wants the Linux Foundation to have to spend their money on lawyers and fines because they had a maintainer who also worked on a research project funded by a sanctioned entity. (If that is how it works, IANAL)

Unless unions work differently where you live, they are a democracy that will pursue whatever issues its members vote on. If members don't think pay is a problem, why would they try to change it?

tl;dr: Run vimtutor, learn vim, enjoy life

It's extremely powerful, for mostly the same reason that it's incomprehensible to newbies. It's focused not on directly inputting characters from your keyboard, but on issuing commands to the editor on how to modify the text.

These commands are simple but combine to let you do exactly what you want with just a few keypresses.

For example:

w is a movement command that moves one word forward.

You can put a number in front of any command to repeat it that many times, so 3w moves three words forward.

d is the delete command. You combine it with a movement command that tells it what to delete. So dw deletes one word and d3w deletes the next three words.

f is the find movement command. You press it and then a character to move to the first instance of that character. So f. will move to the end of the current sentence, where the period is.

Now, knowing only this, if you wanted to delete the next two sentences, you could do that by pressing d2f.

Hopefully I gave a taste of how incredibly powerful, flexible, yet simple this system is. You only need to know a handful of commands to use vim more effectively than you ever could most other editors. And there are enough clever features that any time you think "I wish there was a better way to do this" there most certainly is (as well as a nice description of how).

It also comes with a guide to help you get over the initial learning curve, run vimtutor in a console near you to get started on the path to ~~salvation~~ efficient editing.

So you're saying we should invade Poland?

Before you have an opinion on it, just read the article, it's just one page. https://www2.hawaii.edu/~kent/BenefitsofWorldHunger.pdf

The UN really shot themselves in the foot by deleting it, because the title only looks bad if you don't actually read the rest of the text, which they now made more difficult.

I'm still pissed at being forced to write in a passive voice in university. It's awkward and carries less information, and makes it seem like nobody had any agency, science just kind of happened on its own and you were there to observe it.

I don't know why anyone would prefer something like "An experiment was conducted and it was found that..."

To the much better "We conducted an experiment and found..."

Oil and gas products account for 4.2% of Sweden's exports. The gas exports alone almost rival those of dairy and eggs! Truly a petrostate if I ever saw one

Are you perhaps thinking of a different country?