I am not suggesting specific changes to your canary document. I am (a) explaining someone else’s question that you said you didn’t understand, and (b) pointing out that you might find better response if you clearly and briefly explained at the top of your post why you are posting it here.

To underscore (b): This community is not typically used as a vault for warrant canaries. An argument could be made that they don’t belong here. I don’t feel strongly about it so long as they don’t become a common source of noise, but if you can’t find a better place for them, I think the least you could do is say in one or two sentences why you’re posting one. Without requiring eighteen thousand subscribers (and uncounted additional readers) to sift through off-site links, or make sense of a single field in a wall of monspaced copypasta that has no obvious meaning to the majority of readers.

I think you’ve misunderstood my comment.

Warrant canaries are most noteworthy when they’re not published.

Something cannot be a warrant canary at all unless it is published. Did you mean to say it is most noteworthy when it has been published at least once, and then stopped being published? That would be an example of what I meant by a “change” in my comment.

Back to the original point: You said you don’t understand monk’s first question, so I tried to explain it to you: It was asking whether some change has taken place; some cause for alarm. A change in the document, or its removal, or a failure to update it.

The only way to know that it’s not published is to – publish it. Widely. And routinely.

Indeed. As I said in the last paragraph of my earlier comment.

Edit: In the future, if you’re going to post canaries to general forums like this one, you might want to include a short explanation for community members who aren’t familiar with warrant canaries, or who wonder why you’re posting one here of all places. You didn’t provide any context. I understand the value of posting it, but to most people, your post can easily be seen as irrelevant noise polluting their news feeds.

I’m not GP, but regarding 1:

Warrant canaries are only noteworthy when they are updated. GP is asking if this one was updated, as in whether some attestation was removed, implying that a warrant affecting that attestation has been served since the last one.

If no such change has taken place, then it’s still useful to have a copy of the canary publicly archived (e.g. here) for comparison to future versions, but there’s no reason for the people in this community to spend their time reading it.

Micropython is an interpreter, implemented in C. Anything running in it wouldn’t be an operating system in the sense that we usually mean. Anything incorporating it wouldn’t satisfy OP’s goal of being “only Python”.

If a CPU were developed that used Python bytecode as its official instruction set, perhaps using micropython implemented as microcode, then it might work.

I wonder if you would get different answers if you split your question into two:

• Why do you program for yourself?
• Why do you choose programming as a profession?

Only if they measure their success in terms of traffic on a Microsoft web site.

Successful projects predate GitHub.

I read it as needing a Microsoft account, and having to accept Microsft’s terms and conditions, in order to contribute to an unrelated (and probably open-source) project. That’s a valid complaint.

Maybe D? It’s not a superset of C, but there is substantial shared syntax.

https://archive.ph/4YrDM

deleted by creator

https://www.phoronix.com/review/radeon-rx6700xt-linux/

Based on the 1440p results in that review, I would say that the upgrade might make sense, depending on the games and the price.

It might also be worth finding out whether your games are CPU bound on your system. If they are, maybe consider an X3D CPU instead of a GPU upgrade.

Broadcast by NBC:

https://www.filmaffinity.com/us/film529189.html

Maybe someone at NBC could help?

Nominated for a Golden Globe award in the category for Best TV Special:

https://wolfememorial.com/2016/06/genius-the-movie/

An IMDB comment suggests that it hasn’t been converted to DVD, so it might not be commercially available in digital format.

These look like high school performances:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOkGfVuYUV4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YAE_0b-shMs

If you have a local film archive society, perhaps through a university or library, they might be able to help.

I wonder if someone in these subreddits would have a good lead:

https://old.reddit.com/r/MusicalBootlegs/

https://old.reddit.com/r/rarefilmclub/

When I played Oblivion years ago, I got bored quickly, but I think it was because I was too focused on tackling the main quest line. Knowledge of how the level scaling worked led me to having an overpowered character, and closing the Oblivion gates was repetitive and mostly easy because (IIRC) I could just run past most of the threats.

I heard later that there is a lot of interesting stuff to discover if you ignore the gates. I would like to try that some time, and it would be pretty cool to do it with an upgraded game engine & environment. Here’s hoping this project gets the volunteers it needs.

Something like this?

At least I linked to the code,

I appreciate that. :)

Here’s a fun fact not noted in the article:

It’s #19 in the article.

#17 mentions strict and links to its documentation.

Why does the text in the post start halfway through the text in the link?

People sometimes do this to call attention to the part of an article that they found most interesting.

Kind of annoying to have to click the damned link if the text can just be in the body of the post.

Re-posting the entire body of a copyrighted work is sometimes considered bad form. Some forums ban it outright. Even where it’s not illegal or banned, not everyone likes to do it.

Oh? Was China recently granted arrest jurisdiction in the UK and Canada?

Or are they actually talking about abduction, which AFAIK is still illegal in both countries and would be a violation of their sovereignty?

One can argue that any programming is computer science,

One could argue that, but I think it would be a weak argument.

Keeping within the subcategory of software, I think of computer science as the theoretical side and programming as the practical side. The same distinction is sometimes made in other fields, like physics.

Seems to me that the author saw a show written by people with a narrow and shallow understanding of the field. For better or for worse, it happens on TV all the time. If he wants to demonstrate a widespread disconnect in the software community, there are probably better examples out there.