The two that immediately come to mind are Clarence Darrow and Cicero.

I think it’s a reaction to another institutional tendency, which is to treat the best known theories as if they were incontrovertible facts.

Science and history are largely the search for closer and closer approximations to truth, but those approximations are always flawed and incomplete. And if they’re presented as already-attained truths, a critic can point out the flaws as evidence of deliberate deception—and then present any alternative they like without its being subjected to the same scrutiny.

The current version of Affinity is great and will continue to work forever—there’s no need to switch to an alternative if you’re already using it. I just don’t have much hope for its future development.

Just over a year ago.

I guess technically, Raspbian.

The Affinity Suite is great, but I’m suspicious of its acquisition by Canva—I’m afraid their solution to “bringing the suite to Linux” will be turning it into a web service.

They’re NFPA 704 signs.

A steelman argument (the opposite of a strawman).

Before copyright, storytellers sharing and reusing characters, settings, and plots was the norm. It’s the way humans evolved to tell stories, over tens or hundreds of thousands of years. We instinctively want to hear stories about characters we know, and to see new twists on familiar tales (aka “shit getting weird”). It’s why franchises, fan fiction, and adaptations are so popular.

And copyrights were never intended to protect the work of artists—they were first introduced after the invention of the printing press to censor subversive works being written for a newly-literate public, and quickly evolved into a means of creating monopolies for commercial printers. Writers were eventually given a stake in order to create a new rationale for copyright laws after they were suspended due to public backlash—but that was a minimal concession by the real commercial beneficiaries, not the main purpose.

As others are pointing out, there are mass protests going on—but I think there’s more to it than that.

The general message of all protests is “listen to us or else”. In the US for the last fifty years, “or else” has been understood to mean “or else you’ll lose the next election”—but it’s becoming clear that this threat has no leverage with Trump, either because he’s confident he can manipulate elections (through whatever means) or because he intends to accomplish his goals in his current term and doesn’t care what happens after that.

So protests need to find some other goal and some other message. Right now they’re looking for other weak points (e.g., Tesla dealerships), but once it’s clear they’ve got a strategy Trump is actually afraid of, the numbers will grow.

Ok—to the extent that SVG is HTML, the variant of HTML that it is is a flavor of XML.

More precisely, both are flavors of XML.

I had a really good pizza topped with stinging nettle once.

I always insist on colors within the visible spectrum.

(4) you pass, barely

That implies that 1, 2, and 3 are all failing (perhaps with different degrees of embarrassment). If all failure is equivalent in practice, you might as well maximize the non-failing outcomes and go with A.

Small phones, structuralism, and Mr. Rogers.

Don Mclean’s Vincent.

If they tell law enforcement they can’t produce an unencrypted copy and it’s later proven that they could, the potential penalty would likely be more severe than anything they could have gained by using the data themselves. And any employee (or third party they tried to sell the data to) could rat them out—so they’d have to keep the information within a circle too small to make use of it at scale. And even if it never leaked, hackers would eventually find and exploit the backdoor, exposing its existence. And in either case they’d also have to face lawsuits from shareholders (rightly) complaining that they were never warned of the legal risk.

“West Martians”.

“This Land”.