They are just the biggest asshole in the room.

So one day the different body parts were arguing over who should be in charge.

The eyes said they should be in charge, because they were the primary source of information about the world.

The stomach said it should be in charge because digestion was the source of energy.

The brain said it should be in charge because it was in charge of information processing and decision-making.

The rectum said nothing, just closed up shop.

Before long, the vision was blurry, the stomach was queasy, and the brain was foggy.

Assholes have been in charge ever since.

Amazon allows 2FA, but I’m pretty sure they don’t require it.

I have seen some that seem to be doing that kind of thing, but many others that will reject a bad username before asking for a password.

To double check, I just now tried putting a known bad email address into the username field for amazon.ca and was not then asked for a password, but told that no account could be found.

My possibly flawed understanding of login security is that a failed login should reveal nothing about why the login failed in order to prevent information leakage that can be exploited.

And yet more sites do it, even on desktop. As far as I can tell, most of them are also doing it in a way that breaks security by validating the username before asking for the password.

I saw that. When I get a bit more time, I’ll dig through their custom layout to see what I can figure out.

Thanks.

I’m going to try Unexpected. The swipe for symbol reminds me of my favourite on-screen keyboard, Fitaly. Unfortunately, nobody ever made it available for modern smartphones.

Edit: The main thing I see missing is the option to swipe for uppercase. That may be possible in settings, but I didn’t see it in a quick glance.

Thanks!

The Stalwart mail server allows for that. They call them “spam traps”.

Basically, it’s a real email address that literally never gets used or referenced anywhere, thus assuring any email received is unsolicited by definition. Stalwart’s spam engine uses any such email to help train the spam filter.

I can’t imagine that Stalwart is only one implementing such a system.

I’ve never used Stalwart, but it’s the email server I’ve selected should I decide to do what everyone tells me I shouldn’t: run my own server for me, my wife, and the two domains we control. Their documentation is basically a master class in email.

Oh, probably. I just hope it 30 years before my death. I’m 67. :)

Well, if you can tolerate Google, they actually offer this. If I don’t interact with my accounts for 3 months, it will send the email I’ve composed to designated recipients.

Thanks!

It looks like I need a Windows machine (or VM or wine). Is that correct?

You had me at “BASIC”! I’m going to check it out.

I think that BASIC has historically been my most productive language. My favourite implementation was something called “Z-Basic”, a compiled BASIC with device-independent graphics that could run on and target Apple//, Mac, and PC.

I’m basically a doofus when it comes to web. I had no trouble using Zola as the generator with Abridge and Terminimal as themes.

Add a bit of the right structure and you’ve got the pseudocode for dead reckoning. (I guess that was probably the point, but I’ll hit the ol’ post button anyway…)

Canada used to recommend 1 car-length for every 10 miles per hour. Along with metrification, that was changed to 2 seconds, but it’s been set at 3 seconds for a long time.

I’ve yet to drive in traffic where even 1.5 seconds is manageable. More space than that and some slips into the gap, even if that leaves something like a loaded tractor-trailer hanging a second off their rear bumper.

Edit: Bear with me while I sort out the difference between my display and the resulting code block. Ok, close enough.

Ok, thanks. I would instead (and prefer to ) do something like this:

function test(&obj, &obj2, &a) {
$obj---->doSomething()
---->--->doSomethingElse()

$obj2--->doSomething()
---->--->doSomethingElse()

$a-->--->doSomething()
---->--->doSomethingElse()
}

In this case, the “>” are showing the tab stops and the “-” the resulting white space. Note how all the calls are lined up. (My preferred alignment style, not necessarily anyone else’s.)

Yet another edit: I see that I missed addressing alignment on other than tab boundaries. To me, that’s just sinful! 😀

The way you explain it sounds like how tabs works in MS Word ( or other word processors ).

That is exactly how they work, and after 40 years, I still struggle with the whole “tab as a shortcut for spaces” thing. It’s not that I started with word processors, either, just that as soon I started working with them, everything got so much easier for me.

There are some code-specific things that keep me from just going back to a word processor, but I think our code editors are missing some useful features that are found in word processors.

If I correctly understand what you are saying, you are describing “relative” tabbing, where /t moves a constant distance from the current position. I prefer “stopped” tabs where /t moves to the next tab stop. If my /t doesn’t create the spacing/alignment I’m after, I just tab to the next position.

Thus, I would set mine with the first tab position (for indenting) at 1.5 cm and subsequent tab stops at 3, 4, 5, … cm. That way I’d get perfect alignment with both fixed and proportional fonts.

I’d also set line-wrap or line-continuation to use a hanging indent based on the start position of the line being wrapped or continued.

I’d also set a boundary between code and comments so that lines always wrapped before the boundary and using the comment character at the end of a line would jump to the other side of the boundary with optional leaders (the characters, usually periods that connect the end/beginning of a gap). In an ideal world, I would be able to “hide code”, pulling all the inline comments into a “hanging indent” structure with their “parent” comments.

Yes, before the advent of IDE editors and all the fancy intellisense stuff, I used word-processing software for coding. 😀

Why not tabs for both indentation and alignment? (Actually, I see indentation as just a specific use of alignment.) Word processors have been doing it for decades (and typewriters for over a century!). Surely we can convince our code processors to use user-definable, fixed position tabs instead of relative position “tab = x spaces”.

Keeping the [TAB] character in the file then allows everyone the layout they like.

Or has working solo for 40 years fried my brain?