// Format user object
function formatUserObject(user) {

I’ve seen lots of such crap written by humans. I guess AI had to learn it from somewhere.

You think they can’t redirect their ludicrous police forces (including ICE) to brutalize millions? Don’t underestimate fascism.

The soot.

Right. That’d be a nice bonus.

They’re a terrible gift. I have a zillion candles they I keep around and can’t quite get around to throwing away

Being able to stop time. Unlimited sleep.

Oh I don’t even mind the algorithm. It’s just so full of bugs.

The app is decent.

That’s honestly 90% of it. If Reddit hadn’t programmed their app and mobile website with their feet, I’d probably still be over there.

Idk how Linux handles it but today on Mac I accidentally sent a folder to trash that was in use by four programs at once.

Mac OS did not give a shit. It nuked it.

Sometimes they’re desaturated.

Sometimes they’re 3:4.

Sometimes they’re straight-up black and white.

Changing something about the appearance of of the image is done often. But I don’t think blurry would do unless it’s a really short flashback. It would either look like a mistake (camera not in focus for instance), not be intense enough to be apparent on smaller or lower resolution TVs, or be distracting and annoying to the viewer (say, some sort of foveated motion blur).

Is that what interactive rebase tools use?

I don’t do CLI git

Huh. Never thought of it that way. I was never bothered by a long commit history at all. Search and filter tools in the git client always get me where I want.

The one issue I have is when there are way too many extant branches and the graph takes up happy half my screen.

But that’s more of a Fork issue than it is a fundamental one. The Fork dev could conceivably find a solution for that.

Either way, I guess I see what you mean. I’m just not that strict about commits. Commits just for the linter aren’t a thing since we have a pre-commit hook for that, and typo-fixing commits… Well, they happen, but they’re typically not numerous enough that I’d find them to be any sort of issue.

As for whether I’d really want to revert a particular change – while I work, yes. Afterwards, I see what you mean; i could probably squash 50 commits into 15 or something. But when I think about the time investment of reviewing every commit and thinking about how they ought to be grouped together before making my merge request… I have a lot of trouble convincing myself it’s a good time investment.

Maybe I’d think otherwise if we had a huge team. We have maybe 10 devs on this project at any given time.

That’s a good explanation of what it’s supposed to do. That was how I understood it as well.

But anytime I’ve tried it, I’ve ended up with conflicts where there shouldn’t be (like, I already solved that conflict when I merged earlier) and/or completely undesirable results in the end (for instance, some of my changes are just NOT in the result).

So I just gave up on the whole feature. Simpler to just merge the source branch into mine.

Hmm, I’m less afraid of force push. It does what it says on the tin. If I pushed a fuck-uo to remote and a reset is the simplest way out, you can bet I’m force-pushing that reset.

Why would you want to squash? Feels weird to willingly give up history granularity…

I don’t understand it. Every time I see something about a rebase it’s some purist telling me it’s “cleaner”. Never got it to do what it says on the tin, and never hit a situation that I couldn’t solve using more straightforward tools like merge.

As long as you never touch the rebase button, you’ll be fine. Probably.

Bad memory. It’s built-in and non-optional.

Did you just note Typescript, a superset of JavaScript that needs to be compiled into it, as closer to the system?

Also does it technically constitute a language? That feels like a stretch too.