I can’t recommend password managers enough, because you will never have this issue again.

Have you tried sitting in the same room and ignoring the cat? They love that shit.

I love the way they handled this in Doom Eternal - 6 out of your 7 basic weapons are matched in pairs, so you have 4 ammo types, but very low max ammo count for all of them. Instead you can pretty easily refill your ammo every ~20 seconds (using your chainsaw on an enemy drops ammo, and your chainsaw regens one fuel every ~20 seconds).

This means you never have an incentive to use weak weapons, EXCEPT for if you’re waiting for your fuel to regen. What makes it work is that your “weak weapons” changes depending on the enemies, as every enemy has at least one weakpoint for one of your weapons.

So instead of making you play cautiously and conservatively, Eternal wants you to always use your best weapons and to aggressively push forward. This type of gameplay isn’t for everyone, but as someone who usually ends their games with almost all items because “I might need them later!”, Eternal really allowed me to just have fun with all the best stuff it has to offer.

“Going back”? Aren’t they explicitly saying nothing will change?

Finally, Google told us that its process for security patch releases will not change and that the company will keep publishing security patches each month on a dedicated security-only branch for relevant OS releases just as it does today.

Yes, both lemmy.zip and piefed.zip have had issues for weeks

ESP is cheaper

It’s a timecat! (In cat language, cat translates to “lord”)

He just like me frfr

Even for CPU-heavy titles it depends on the exact instructions. Sometimes multiple instructions in one architecture can be replaced by a single one in another. But that’s rare, on average performance will be negatively affected.

They are trying to make Alyx work standalone: https://www.digitalfoundry.net/news/2025/11/valve-looking-into-a-steam-frame-half-life-alyx-standalone-experience

But that will probably be an exception due to the amount of resources Valve will invest into getting it to work well, you’re right that few other games on that level would run standalone.

And the one of all the pride my dad feels for me!

manul

Yes, there exist different kinds of type safety. What the fuck are you even asking?

Sure, never claimed anything different. Runtime type safety != type safety.

There are plenty of libraries to provide type safety at runtime.

Yes it is? It isn’t strictly sound, but it is type-safe aside from explicit escape hatches (which other type-safe languages also provide).

I always wonder if fish fear cats/dogs that watch them. I hope not, because it seems quite entertaining!

That is not a good enough reason to justify its existence.

There is no better reason to justify the existence of any technology than it having objective advantages, even if there are drawbacks as well!

You can very well say that fossil fuel companies should continue to exist because look at how long it’s been around with all the expertise people have. Surely they should stay around, right?

You’re pretending that I’m making a completely different argument. Don’t do that. I never mentioned “how long it’s been around with all the expertise people have”. There are literal objective advantages. Why are you pretending they don’t exist?

Please also see my other comment

So people should choose a model that decreases development speed & increases complexity as well as the potential for bugs/side effects, just because “it’s the right way to go”. People have been trying to embrace the cascade for a long, long, long time, and it keeps causing issues in larger applications that simply don’t happen with non-cascading approaches.

Why do you pretend like these aren’t real advantages?

See, that’s a great example of a critique that nobody with professional experience would make.

There is a natural tendency to try reinvent something when you don’t understand it enough to be comfortable with it. Then that new thing lacks the maturity and scrutiny that the old thing went through to survive the test of time.

While this is something that does happen, there’s also a tendency for people in the industry to dismiss new things without actually looking into the pros and cons.

Doesn’t it give you pause that many very experienced Frontend & CSS developers see objective advantages in Tailwinds utility class approach? Of course there are also objective disadvantages, don’t get me wrong. But that means that these tools should be used whenever their advantages can shine and their disadvantages don’t cause issues.

Any developer that can’t clearly name the issues with regular CSS that Tailwind attempts to solve either hasn’t been developing long enough to encounter these issues, or hasn’t actually tried to understand what Tailwind is.