What? You just transfer your files directly, exactly as you could with an ancient iPod or whatever.
If there's no "file matching" service - how does the OP i'm responding to "upgrade" the sound quality of the files on the device?
Even if you have the bones of a good story, even if you're a talented writer, a good editing process can transform your work from an unreadable mess to an actual solid novel.
Also, there’s nothing stopping someone self publishing from getting an editor to polish their manuscript before publication.
The truth is that most authors who self publish are simply not good at writing.
I am generally a fan of self publishing, it’s great for good writers as they get to keep more of the money and for the ones on the border it allows them to get something out there that might be good enough for a small audience.
It seems to me there has been a decline in the quality of editing by major publishers in recent years – though it may be that I have become better at noticing prose that would benefit from editing. Self-published stuff is normally worse, but it’s no surprise: hiring an editor would turn many self-published books from a modest profit to a heavy loss.
The thing is that writing can be bad in a multitude of ways, and a good editor can fix at least one of those — and, at the very least, help ensure that the ideas on paper are written according to the norms and conventions of the language.
I don't feel I'm learning anything useful by wrestling with the fiddly JSON build configurations in VS Code.
On the other hand, creating some kind of convoluted, contrived paper trail to claim that mysterious third parties were the ones to have physically pressed the "Accept" button on your 100 fake accounts and so you didn't even know there was a EULA seems kind of like it might actually be fraud.
A full paper trail would also necessarily disclose the entity that provided those devices, which they may well be loathe to do (since it either drags in a related company, who Apple can then also target, or embarrasses a third party who would rather remain nameless).
However, in practice, a technology engineering firm claiming to have no knowledge of the licensing that applies to the devices in which they also claim expertise, is such a far-fetched statement that it's almost trivially set aside, and earns a rebuke from the bench to boot.
This is standard practice at large companies when reverse engineering chips, devices and software and seems very similar to the above eula argument.
1a. one team examines the device and products a detailed specification of it
1b. another team works solely off that newly produced specification; this team has zero contact with the actual device
In this hypothetical case:
2a. a third party affiliate accepts the Apple EULA, and gives the Apple IDs to NSO Group
2b. NSO Group uses the Apple IDs as credential to obtain Apple services
Notice that in case 2b, NSO Group has actual contact with Apple in two ways. They used Apple IDs, and that they obtain Apple services. This didn't happen in the reverse engineering case.
Lots of people negotiated these things and agreed to make commerce happen.
Novel to you does not mean novel to humanity.
As it should be. It doesn’t always work well for all circumstances, but we don’t have a better system
However, "common sense" is also not how it works, so sure, when people rely on what they expect "common sense" to mean, then they too get screwed (the meaning of "common sense" after all varying dramatically from person to person).
Law has its own principles, philosophy, and practices, that's all. And judges, especially senior judges, do not like it one iota when folks try to circumvent the meaning, substance, and purpose of these elements.
That doesn't mean the nerds are wrong to want what they want.
People have a pretty good idea of its mechanisms.
Powerful people break laws that are clear enough and then don't go to jail because of "prosecutorial discretion" or Johnnie Cochran or retroactive telecoms immunity for illegal mass surveillance.
Powerless people break laws that are ambiguous, or most people don't even know exist, or people know exist but they're only enforced against the nameless and poor, and the US has the largest prison population in the world.
This outcome is your great victory for "millennia to work out the kinks in the system and develop practices that are robust in the face of adversarial attack by actual smart people"?
> trail of tears
> coders can't seem to keep basic services operating in ideal conditions and yet you expect anyone to look to this group when it comes to actual life and death decisions?
We already have code running when it comes to actual life and death decisions. There is code running in aircraft and heart bypass machines, and it works, because then people care that it works. Nobody cares enough that some ad tracking code is perfectly reliable and efficient, so it isn't.
You're also asking for a double standard. The OpenBSD people do a nice job on OpenSSH. It's pretty good, not perfect. There have been vulnerabilities in even that. Then they get patched.
But you can't possibly be claiming that there are no "vulnerabilities" in the law. If that was the case then why do they have to keep passing new ones every year? The ask isn't that it never change, it's that it be changed by the legislature prospectively instead of being in a constant state of superposition until it's resolved by a court ex post facto.
I know this true of other languages too, but Germany really loves to do this: use "English" phrases which are either simply wrong or have another meaning than intended, or no clear meaning (here it's pill testing, basically).
I don't know why they do this! It's really irritating as an anglophone immigrant to Germany. German is a real language, they can just say Drogenprüfung, who knows why they don't.
As others said: foreign, exotic and important.
But hopefully I added an explanation of why.
Its entertaining to watch.
What English speakers called "cinéma vérité," French speakers called "direct cinema."
I generally only update these when I need a new feature or bug fix, which means I'm unlikely to get bitten by any temporary security compromise.
If the "particular checkout of vcpkg" type of approach is impossible with other package managers, that's unfortunate.
npm modules aren't the same as boost. Boost is written and scrutinized by some of the best C++ minds on the planet.
npm modules are written by anyone. they are all open source, but so many are in use that i doubt they get the scrutiny they deserve. at one point there was a package just to left-align things and a bug in it broke thousands of services.
but that's the landscape the modern web is built on, for better or for worse.
Can I come live with you? It's sad that I'm only half joking.
I refuse to believe that swiping through pages of icons or typing their names into a search box is the best we can do. Some day we'll get a radically new iOS.