kevincox

It also supports iOS.

No, the DRM wouldn't work at higher levels so you would have the same requirements with regard to 4k.

Let's take a little recess and circle back.

You seem to be making this very complex. But it really isn't. Yes, git doesn't track renames. So you are working around it by splitting your operation into 2 commits.

1. A pure rename.
2. A file change.

This way 1 is always considered a rename and 2 is just a regular file change with the same path. You may also consider tweaking the default rename detection threshold with flags like --find-renames or options like diff.renameLimit.

Would it be nice if Git tracked renames? Probably. But that isn't how the data model works so it is unlikely to happen soon. But maybe they could add some metadata.

I think it doesn't really make sense. Because you can't "squash" one commit. squash is taking multiple commits and making them one.

When you do a "squash merge" you are really saying "squash all the commits that are on this branch and not the target" then merge.

So you can't "squash a merge commit" you need at least one additional commit to squash in.

No, but you can still choose to choose software that doesn't steal and sell your data. You can also support laws that make doing this illegal.

The idea that putting this on your phone is bonkers is bonkers to me. Why would you want to carry around a journal or paper when you have everything on your phone? It can also be more easily backed up and synced.

It shouldn't be normal that this data is stolen and sold. That is 100% the problem, not the fact that people track things on computers.

You have obviously never tried dereferencing a null pointer.

you’re just paying more for no reason

You are basically paying the credit card fees for not using a card. It is a protection racket. "It'd be a shame if you didn't use our credit card and had to pay extra due to card processing fees".

We should do what the EU did. Clamp card fees to a small value so that they can't meaningfully offer customers rewards which creates this twisted incentive.

Or stores just make the customer pay (most of) the card fees. As you said lots of smaller stores do this and I'm more than happy to pay with debit.

They are legal if you follow the regulations. The problem with the "rideshare" companies is that they don't. We should just call them "unregulated taxis" rather than pretending that they are a different service. I think just about every taxi company these days is on some app or another (often the same that call unregulated cabs in countries that actually got their shit together and banned the unregulated ones).

Nah it's worse. Bitcoin actually has legitimate uses. (Yes, they are a minority of actual usage, but they exist.) NFTs are only useful for speculation, gambling and money laundering.

"Rideshare" is also the least accurate term used to dodge regulations. It is just a taxi/cab. You are paying someone to get you from one place to another. They aren't sharing their ride, they were never going where you are going before you told them to.