Did you read the comments above?

You can’t just ignore context and proclaim some universal truth, which just happens to be your opinion.

Nope.

If there’s a clear definition that there can be something, implicit and explicit omission are equivalent. And that’s exactly the case we’re talking about here.

None. The project was ultimately cancelled for unrelated reasons.

I had lengthy discussions about that because two companies conventions collided.

We talked literally hours about the benefits of build numbers, branch specific identifiers and so on.

I find it really weird that something as simple as the basic functionality of nextcloud seemingly can’t be implemented in a stable and lightweight manner.

Nextcloud always seems one update away from self destruction and it prepares for that by hoarding all the resources it can get. It never feels fast or responsive. I just want a way to share files between my machines.

There are other solutions, I know, but they’re all terrible in their own way.

That’s exactly not the thing, because nobody broke the contract, they simply interpret it differently in details.

Having a null reference is perfectly valid json, as long as it’s not explicitly prohibited. Null just says “nothing in here” and that’s exactly what an omission also communicates.

The difference is just whether you treat implicit and explicit non-existence differently. And neither interpretation is wrong per contract.

It can, but especially during serialization Java sometimes adds null references to null values.

That’s usually a mistake by the API designer and/or Java dev, but happens pretty often.

No. That’s theft at most.

In any case, equating taking a hat and physical violence is just absolutely bonkers. Every psychologist would diagnose that as an anger management disorder.

I disagree with the implication and outrage about it.

It seems like ragebait, just like “gen Z doesn’t want to work” crap.

But I regularly throw a few handfuls of assorted pills and drive around the continent for a full weekend.

I literally can’t use that car!!!

Especially people in the US seem to have a weird violence boner. It’s (unfortunately) perfectly normal that some people like violence, but over there, a concerning percentage of people think that every minor transgression justifies violence.

Look at the comments below those typical “fuck around and find out” videos. A guy snatches a hat as a bad joke and gets beaten up. That’s not okay, that’s assault, but the comments celebrate it.

Of course it is. It’s a job that doesn’t really exists, but gets advertised.

That’s not how this works, though.

These “jobs” are just a way to acquire talent. A larger company can almost always need a few more “good workers”. So if a really good candidate comes along, they’ll snatch that person, if the candidate is just okayish, they tell them someone else got the job.

Das ist also bei dir nicht Unwissenheit, sondern schon bewusste Ignoranz.

Das ist auch ein Kommentar.

Die Tatsache, dass du das nicht unterscheidest, zeigt aber gerade das Dilemma. Kommentare sollen Meinungen transportieren. Normale Nachrichten sollen aber neutral sein.

Weil gerade die öffentlich rechtlichen panische Angst davor haben, jemand könnte ihnen Meinung vorwerfen. Selbst wenn die Meinung eigentlich etwas selbstverständliches ist.

No.

Interoperability is only required, if you have a significant market share. Apple does not have this in the EU. iMessage specifically doesn’t fall under this regulation, since hardly anyone uses it.

And since Apple plans to publish an SDK for their intelligence anyway, you can’t really regulate them for being too closed.

So either that’s a purely political retaliation, or their “super privacy friendly” services aren’t as privacy friendly as they claim.

But that’s the thing, many of their decisions make no economic sense.

I have to say, I’m so confused, how so many stupid people can make it to the top, and how well the companies often work despite them.