brisk

The origin of the hobby 3D printer is the RepRap project, a community open hardware project. Josef Prusa was actively involved. The first printer the company actively sold - the Prusa i3 - is still on the RepRap website.

They got a bit more restrictive with their licencing terms in the recent past which is both understandable and a bit of a slap in the face to where they came from, but they're still the most open 3D printer manufacturer.

(Not the most open 3d printer though, that award has to go to DIY only models like the Voron)

Any idea if this is true outside the US?

People with computer science degrees often work as software engineers but Computer Scientists are not Software Engineers. Computer Scientists are mathematicians. Theoretically you can do pretty good computer science without ever touching a computer - it's the mathematics of computation, which is much broader than the machines we keep on our desks. Software Engineers are not typically mathematicians.

I say this as someone who is qualified as a software engineer. I would absolutely love to be involved in computer science, but I'm trained for engineering not mathematics.

This is the difference between Computer Science (a field of mathematics) and Software Engineering (a field of engineering).

Certainly for all. I was mostly thinking in terms of e.g. languages that (can) compile to LLVM, since you have the intermediate form already defined. But then languages layer quite a lot on top of LLVM in terms of abstractions and safety constraints that make it probably a bad intermediary even for that subset. Even just for one language, there must be something ~~fun~~useful that can be done just by viewing the same code with different syntaxes.

This also reminds me of the spatial computing project DynamicLand

I fundamentally disagree with the idea that "programming sucks" but there are some neat thoughts and tools in there.

This bit in particular:

We don't even have to give up code! The GUI version of a program could merely be one of several human-editable representations. Just as some people love text-based interfaces to their operating systems, some people will continue to enjoy code-based interfaces to software editing. It just doesn't have to be the default—or the only—option anymore.

I've often thought about the idea that to an extent a programming syntax does not have to be married to a language. We could potentially have editors and syntaxes designed so that each developer can interact with the code in the syntax they're most comfortable with, independent of the language. I don't know how realisable this is, it may be underestimating how tightly coupled syntax and language is.

I'm not a big fan of graphical programming in general, but there are times when I would like it just for a single function or class, for signal processing or control systems or state machines. I usually think of this in terms of editor plugins or external code gen tools rather than whole environments. Although every code gen tool I've used to date sucks.

If the US would pass a law shielding companies from lawsuits related to donated food, then this could become the norm

Well good news then! That law is set to be passed in just thirty years ago

This idea is a myth used to excuse immoral behaviour.

I've never encountered this. Wikipedia only mentions sugar under "varieties: US", so you should be good if you want to claim the international version.

Ice Age was a great family movie. Too bad they never made any sequels.

Super is for my window manager.

Which I guess is kind of where copy paste live so I'm on board, barring semantic nitpicks

Currently "older cards" is GTX 10xx series and earlier

This is a deliberate choice made by Nvidia with respect to their proprietary drivers, and has nothing to do with the operating system.