As a Vim user, this is a good idea.

As a vim user, I too agree. Vim is my favorite editor, but the learning curve being a barrier to adoption is an undeniable fact.

Just would hate to have vi dropped entirely, like it is in NixOS / GuixSD.

Also, I can't recommend vimtutor enough to anyone new to it who doesn't have nano at their disposal.

Would prefer if something like nano but non-GPL was available for the BSDs.

That Healing Back Pain book helped a lot of my wrist/back pain as well as my partner's back pain.

I use Google assistant daily for adding things to shopping list, simple trivia, weather, etc.

Agreed. Oracle sucks and needs to die off. The sooner the better.

Would this open the door for some schmucko to copyright push, pop, enqueue, dequeue, etc?

An even more problematic example:

https://docs.oracle.com/javase/6/docs/api/java/lang/String.h...

So...I guess this api signature for string concatenation is on the verge of being owned by oracle forever. Perhaps I can create a non-derived work by adding a few extra arguments.

I'd bet that isolated examples couldn't be copyrighted any more than a single sentence in a novel couldn't be copyrighted. Doesn't it have to do with the whole work?

The case is about APIs, not the whole work. By their very nature, all APIs are both:

1. Single sentence.

2. Usually obvious. In fact, just about every API definition in the above linked String method list is blatantly obvious, and many of the APIs look similar to ones in various other completely incompatible languages.

So even if you argue the copyrighted work is comprised of the whole set of APIs, it may be patent-able as an invention, but it does not seem reasonable to suggest it be protected by copyright.

Hopefully only the specific Java incantation. Other languages have different syntax, so arguably they are not Java.

    Java: public String concat(String str)

    Javascript: String.prototype.concat ( [ string1 [ , string2 [ , … ] ] ] )

    Python: def __add__(self, *args, **kwargs)

    C++: function <string> std::operator+ (string)

Use vararg for parameters to pass to iconv

Just rename it : Konkat. Easy /s

The better question is would this case mean someone already has the copyright on push, pop, enqueue, dequeue? Someone originally came up with all those APIs, and they (or the people they were working for or otherwise sold it to) would would own any copyright.

(The answer is probably no, I'm sure a half decent lawyer would manage to distinguish that from this case since it is so simple).

This case has the appeals court striking down de minimus claims as well. : /

I wonder how those idiot judges on the appeals court would feel if a bunch of programmers with Sharpies ran rampant through their law books, altering the long-established order of things with essentially no knowledge of what they were doing. It's a shame the universe doesn't provide for karmic retribution at this level.

Downvote if you like, but there's no other way to describe the absence of de minimis exceptions besides "idiocy." These judges are essentially monkeys in a machine shop.

Perhaps they are not idiots, they are just trying to apply laws written for books and music to software. That is not their fault, they don't get to make laws, only interpret them.

I think this is another case where the law makers have been rather slow to keep up. Copyright is not really working in this era.

> That is not their fault, they don't get to make laws, only interpret them.

Isn't that exactly what the parent of your post called:

> These judges are essentially monkeys in a machine shop.

Blindly trying to apply an unfitting law, because those are the instructions?

The absence of de minimis exceptions is not that important because API copyrights are a terrible idea all on their own.

Eh, that's nitpicking. "class Stack<T> { void push(t: T); T pop(void); }" is not too abstract, and has been written down many times.

Yes and no, I guess if that's what they meant then yes I was nitpicking but I took it literally (lots of folks confuse concepts between patents, copyrights and trademarks. Less common on HN but still happens. )

I've been asked to literally test that values are incremented. Like, does ++ add 1 to the value in C, just to be safe, for the sake of 100% coverage.

I've seen tests that essentially look like that, and tests that, when you really look at it, pretty much just test the testing framework and mocking library and don't really exercise application code. It's infuriatingly useless.

Unrelated but my last employer wanted a full design document and then a full test plan down to each individual unit test before we wrote any code. But then we would constantly be called out in review about not having enough detail and if you.out enough detail you'd get called out for skipping ahead in the process. They also had no coding standard or style guide to speak of. I'm glad I left that job.

Does this add a lot of much needed wireless support? I tried this on my wrt3200acm and lost quite a few wireless features and was forced to switch back.

That's dependent on likely Broadcom to release an open source driver so it can work on a later kernel.

chrome://flags

Search for "for you"

Disable.

Saved you a click

Direct link:

chrome://flags/#enable-ntp-remote-suggestions

Every time I find a useful Chrome flag they remove it in the next release and make you install extensions. Not sure if it's different on Android.

They don't care because you and people like you are obviously buying them.