> I think that it's also important to consider that it's much easier to cut oneself when using a double edge razor.
I've actually found it to be the opposite in my case, after having used a double-edge safety razor for almost 7 years. When I use the DE razor, I know exactly where the blade is and it gives me greater control if I need to go over a spot again that I missed. With the disposable razor, I've always found it difficult to tell where the blades are on my skin, which makes me prone to errors. The multiple blades in sequence also make it much more nick-prone when going against the grain for a closer shave, or as in the missed-spot scenario I just mentioned.
But yes, you're right - it's basically impossible to travel with a DE razor without a checked bag. Even just carrying the handle without the blade in your carry-on is a risk. I have an acquaintance who lost his DE handle to a TSA agent that wasn't interested in understanding that the handle by itself poses no more risk than a toothbrush. So, if I'm flying, I'll suffer with the disposable razor and never shave against the grain.
Bevel makes disposable safety razors for travel. Yes disposable double edged safety razors. They are quite nice nice. It's a plastic handle with standard double edged blade in there but it's non removable.
I stand corrected! I do suppose I could also get a travel safety razor that comes apart into 3 parts (as opposed to a single piece with a butterfly opening) and pack them separately. Of course that could mean some blade wastage: I'm rarely in one location long enough to use up all 5 in a pack.
> Fingers crossed for remote work bringing some sort of equalizer effect here.
I work at a fully-remote company, and my org had a meetup soon after I first started working here. I was surprised to see how many of the people I work with seemed to be below average height. I've never really done anything to verify it, but I have a hunch based on that anecdata that the median height at my fully-remote company might be lower than the median height of the US population and/or lower than the median height at similarly-sized enterprises that have in-person hiring and work.
> Copilot is bad at accessibility because web engineers are bad at accessibility. All of the bad habits in this post were learned from its training data.
100%, and this is why Copilot is damn-near unusable for Bash scripting (yeah, the real problem is Bash scripting, use a better scripting language etc etc, but I do it, you've probably done it, and we've all definitely worked with codebases with Bash script linchpins) - there's a lot of bad Bash out there.
I'll just quote from Stevey's Google Platforms Rant
> Like anything else big and important in life, Accessibility has an evil twin who, jilted by the unbalanced affection displayed by their parents in their youth, has grown into an equally powerful Arch-Nemesis (yes, there's more than one nemesis to accessibility) named Security. And boy howdy are the two ever at odds.
> But I'll argue that Accessibility is actually more important than Security because dialing Accessibility to zero means you have no product at all, whereas dialing Security to zero can still get you a reasonably successful product such as the Playstation Network.
I'm fully aware that I'm commenting with a drive-by facetious block quote, but it is a reality that "insecure but accessible" has more users than "secure but inaccessible".
It uses the native iOS video player APIs, which (to my knowledge, it's been a while since I tried) the official app doesn't. Also overall, it follows a lot of the "recommended" iOS design guidelines and has the look and feel of an Apple-made app (fonts, long-press behaviour, slide elements to perform actions, haptic feedback, etc).
I think they've mentioned that they expect that their generics spec will evolve, plus they're waiting to see what idioms emerge before refactoring the standard library.
For now there are some experimental things in the exp module. See the maps and slices packages there. But yes, my understanding is also that they kind of waiting to see how generics work out. They've promised to make no breaking changes to Go v1, so adding any functions to the standard library is not to be taken lightly.
I think almost everyone is waiting to see those idiom too (myself included). If I'm going to rewrite stuff, I want to be able to justify it (less LOC may be be enough) and "do it right". Hopefully I get to see them in the sdlib soon!
Probably. Google and GitHub already support WebAuthn for 2FA so it's relatively trivial for them to ditch passwords altogether and use WebAuthn as the single credential.
I've actually found it to be the opposite in my case, after having used a double-edge safety razor for almost 7 years. When I use the DE razor, I know exactly where the blade is and it gives me greater control if I need to go over a spot again that I missed. With the disposable razor, I've always found it difficult to tell where the blades are on my skin, which makes me prone to errors. The multiple blades in sequence also make it much more nick-prone when going against the grain for a closer shave, or as in the missed-spot scenario I just mentioned.
But yes, you're right - it's basically impossible to travel with a DE razor without a checked bag. Even just carrying the handle without the blade in your carry-on is a risk. I have an acquaintance who lost his DE handle to a TSA agent that wasn't interested in understanding that the handle by itself poses no more risk than a toothbrush. So, if I'm flying, I'll suffer with the disposable razor and never shave against the grain.