Lensflare said Dear great ux lords at ms azure devops, could you make the whole freaking button clickable instead of just the text inside of the button?,I‘ve not seen a single ad spam post today, so far.
Thank you @retoor!,End of the year. Management announced that the project that our team has been working in for more than 4 years, will be killed.
Shit.,I just released JoyRant build 30 with some improvements:

* fixed user-mention text insertion for iOS 18
* improved text selection in rants and comments to make it easier to quote specific parts of comments. See screenshot.

TestFlight link:
https://testflight.apple.com/join/...

I'm curious to know who uses JoyRant here.
I can see 48 users in TestFlight but there are probably many duplicates.,I think I‘ll bite the bullet and write my own version of SwiftRant (Swift REST API for devRant) with modern concurrency and a clean implementation and without semaphores and force unwraps which cause app crashes.,Yesterday‘s Windows 11 update brought back an old bug which I haven’t seen since Windows 8 or so.

The EN keyboard layout is added in the task bar UI but it‘s not actually there when you try to remove it in the settings.

Fucking hell! Why even make new versions of Windows if it‘s all the same pile of shit?

That‘s not the only old bug that persists across multiple major Windows versions!,Another weird property of the devRant API:

For every POST request the url parameters need to be passed in the http body instead of in the URL, like this:
app=3&user_id=42

Wtf why?,I have finished my project for a new devrant sdk in swift:

https://github.com/WilhelmOks/...

(Yes, the readme is missing and I will add it later 😅)

And I built it into JoyRant (build 32), which required quite a bit of refactoring.

I think I tested everything but let me know if you find any problems.

You will need to logout and log in again.

The downvote reason feature isn‘t there yet (in JoyRant), but now I have a good basis to add it 😄

Yes, implementing a whole new SDK just for one little feature is overkill, but I had fun doing it and I wanted to have a nice, clean and extensible code base which I can work on in the future. 😌,Let‘s talk about time travel and the bootstrap paradox (look it up if you don‘t know what it is)

I think that I have a solution for this paradox, but it requires the many worlds interpretation (quantum mechanics) to be true.
I‘m in the many worlds camp anyway.

So, how can an object exist in a time loop? The paradox is that it looks like it has no origin. It wasn‘t created. It just exists.

What if the act of time travel puts you into a different world, just like any decision puts you into a different world?

I‘d argue that the object has an origin and it was created. But it was created in a different world (different timeline, if you will). The person who observes the object in a loop is not in the same world as the person who observes the object being created.
After its creation, the object has entered the loop and by traveling in time it also traveled into a different world, where the creation event never happened.

This also solves the grandfather paradox in my opinion, because there is no contradiction when you go back in time and kill your grandfather. You are in a different world. You will never be born in that world, but so what, you are from a different world.

What do you think?,Here is my idea for a time machine which can only send one bit of information back in time.

@Wisecrack has asked me about it and I didn’t want to write it in comments because of the character limit.

So here we go.

The DCQE (delayed-choice quantum eraser) is an experiment that has been successfully performed by many people in small scale.
You can read about it on wikipedia but I'll try to explain it here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

First I need to quickly explain the double slit experiment because DCQE is based on that.
The double slit experiment shows that a particle, like a photon, seems to go through both slits at the same time and interfere with itself as a wave to finally contribute to an interference pattern when hit on a screen. Many photons will result in a visible interference pattern.
However, if we install a detector somewhere between the particle emitter an the screen, so that we know which path the particle must have taken (which slit it has passed through), then there will be no interference pattern on the screen because the particle will not behave as a wave.
For the time machine, we will interpret the interference pattern as bit 1 and no interference pattern as bit 0.

Now the DCQE:
This device lets us choose if we know the path of the particle or if we want wo erase this knowledge. And we can make this decision after the particle hit the screen (that is the "delayed" part), with the help of quantum entanglement.
How does it work?
Each particle send out by the emitter will pass through a crystal which will split it into an entangled pair of particles. This pair shares the same quantum state in space and time. If we know the path of one of the particle "halves", we also know the path of the other one. Remember the knowledge about the path determines if we will see the interference pattern. Now one of the particle "halves" goes directly into the screen by a short path. The other one takes a longer path.
The longer path has a switch that we can operate (this is the "choice" part). The switch changes the path that the particle takes so that it either goes through a detector or it doesn't, determining if it will contribute to the intererence pattern on the screen or not. And this choice will be done for the short path particle-half because their are entangeld.
The path of the first half particle is short, so it will hit the screen earlier.
After that happened, we still have time to make the choice for the second half, since its path is longer. But making the choice also affects the first half, which has already hit the screen. So we can retroactively change what we will see (or have seen) on the screen.
Remember this has already been tested and verified. It works.

The time machine:
We need enough photons to distinguish the patterns on the screen for one single bit of information.
And the insanely difficult part is to make the path for the second half long enough to have something practical.
Also, those photons need to stay coherent during their journey on that path and are not allowed to interact with each other.
We could use two mirrors, to let the photons bounce between them to extend the path (or the travel duration), but those need to be insanely pricise for reasonable amounts of time.
Just as an example, for 1 second of time travel, we would need a path length about the distance of the moon to the earth. And 1 second isn't very practical. To win the lottery we would need at least many hours.
Also, we would need to build the whole thing multiple times, one for each bit of information.

How to operate the time machine:
Turn on the particle emitter and look at the screen. If you see an interference pattern, write down a 1, otherwise a 0.
This is the information that your future you has sent you.
Repeat this process with the other time machines for more bits of information.
Then wait the time which corresponds to the path length (maybe send in your lottery numbers) and then (this part is very important) make sure to flip the switch corresponsing to the bit that you wrote down, so that your past you receives that info in the past.

I hope that helps :),Why the hell do languages like Kotlin (Java) and C# handle dates and datetimes so needlessly complicated?
There are multiple types with different implementations and concepts like local time or time zones represented by those types. Some of them have capabilities like serialization, some of them don’t.
Parsing and encoding is tied to the types.

Why? Take Swift as an example:
It has one single Date type (including time) which represents a point in time independent of any calendar, time zone, encoding or format.
There is a DateFormatter to parse from APIs from iso or timestamps or whatever and to format to UI as a string in any language (localization), for any region, in any format.
If you just want a container for the date time components themselves (which the concept of local date time seems to be in those languages), you can use the DateComponents type. If you are interested in dates from the perspective of a calendar, there is a Calendar type.

Everything makes sense and the different concepts are decoupled from each other as they should be.

Damn! My memory about C# is a bit hazy but Kotlin, I’m disappointed in you! Date handling is a horrible mess!
Ok, I guess I can blame it on Java and JVM.,Weird how words keep changing meaning as you add other words to them:

pass
pass off
pass off as,Fasching/Karneval is the most retarded German annual tradition by a long shot.

I honestly don‘t get the obsession that so many people have with it.,How is platonism still so prevalent among mathematicians?

We know by now that there are different mathematical models depending on different axioms, like the axiom of choice. You can include or omit it from the model and you get consistent and useful but different mathematics in either case.
And there are other examples.

How does this not make it obvious that formalism, rather than platonism, is true?```