Afternoon becomes an evening when the sun starts to set. An evening becomes a night when the sun is fully set.
"I was up at two this morning" has several implied meanings. One of them equals to "I was up until two last night", others do not.
If you were up until two last night, you might legitimately express that with "I was up at two this morning". But if you were up at two this morning, saying "I was up until two last night" might or might not convey the truth. For example, you might have just gotten up.
Many if not all languages have nuances like this. I don't find them particularly odd at all, or specific to English, for that matter...
... because I was just reading about Michael J. Fox's Parkinson's disease (because of his recent movie "Still") and apparently he and two other people who worked in his earliest TV show (where he was a secondary character) got early onset Parkinson's, and he claims this is a mere coincidence, not enough to consider this a relevant "cluster" of Parkinson's.
In both cases it's three people who worked closely together catching a relatively rare disease. I wonder if it's relevant for Tarkovsky, given that Michael J. Fox thinks it wasn't relevant for him...
well the main difference seems to be that some crew in stalker stated they had the sense of being poisoned in that dust and fume cloud and also developed accute allergic reactions. Its still all just based on the statements of the sound technician, i did not find interviews with other crew that said the same, but i'm sure there are some interview transcriptions in russian print somewhere. In the end the best source would probably be the estonian death statistics for cancer increases closer to those areas or further downstream the same river.
That got me wondering at a first glance too. But in this case, the word stands for "čuda" not CUDA.
Čuda = miracles, wonders, in Serbian (and several other languages).
And odd conglomerate of words from different languages perhaps, one even anglicized (ASCIIzed?) at that... Well, it does get the people talking, I suppose.
In trademark law, the owner of a mark (Nvidia in the case of CUDA) can usually make someone stop using a mark if it would lead to “consumer confusion about the source of the goods” (i.e. people seeing “CudaText” and assuming it has an association with Nvidia/CUDA).
IANAL, and have no idea how likely Nvidia would be to succeed in a trademark dispute with this developer. But in situations like this, it’s often good to just not use a name if a large section of your target audience could become confused upon hearing it. Even if you didn’t know about the other product when you came up with your name, and even if it’s technically legal.
Author of CudaText here. If I will get the complain from NVIDIA I can rename the project to 'CudeText', word 'cude' is 'miracle'. Now I think that similar name was a little mistake from my side, I needed to name it 'CudeText' earlier.
It's done afterwards, once you've safely reduced the speed of your vehicle, not during the initial emergency braking.
It's basically a heads up for all the vehicles far behind you that haven't yet noticed a sudden change in the flow of the traffic. Gives them more time to reduce speed without haste.
You don't actually need to give the changes back to the community, you only need to give the changed code to those you distribute the modified software to.
In other words:
- if you don't publish the modified software, you don't need to give the changed code to anyone
- if you distribute the modified software to a single entity, you only need to give the changed code to that single entity (and they absolutely do not need to publish it)
- etc.
I know people mostly view this through the eyes of large public projects, forks, etc., but there more to it then that.
That being said, according to their blog, browser users aren't tracked or profiled by Vivaldi.
They claim to make money from search engine partner deals and from bookmark partner deals. And to be honest, I have no reason to think that the statement isn't true.
Just to note for those who don't know, FTPS and SFTP are completely different protocols.
The similarity of the names often causes confusion, but SFTP has nothing to do with the venerable FTP.
SFTP stands for "SSH file transfer protocol" and it's a completely different beast. IMHO, a somewhat unfortunate naming choice, but that's water under the bridge.
(...while FTPS stands for "FTP over SSL", and that actually uses plain old FTP with an additional SSL/TLS layer...)
> The snap is not running macOS on mac hardware. Even if you run it on a mac laptop, it's using virtualized qemu hardware.
Right. "Virtualized hardware", as in, you know, software. In other words, QEMU is software that runs on actual nonvirtualized hardware, in this laptop's example produced by Apple.
If you think differently, I invite you to virtualize a sailboat and than sail with it out to sea.
I suspect that somewhere along the way, the difference between virtaulized sailboats and actual sailboats will become more readily apparent... :)
You're reading of my comment is not charitable at all. I'm making the distinction specifically because of the DMCA's anti-circumvention measures, which specifically apply to circumventing digital copyright. Obviously any analogy to a sailboat is unrelated to the DMCA and unrelated to my comment.
I do agree that specific sentence of mine is poorly worded, but the point that it still requires that circumvention stands regardless of the poor wording.
I linked to the bit of the snap that I believe may constitute circumvention under the DMCA. I welcome you to actually respond to what I meant in my comment, and not with some strawman of an intentionally poor interpretation of it.
In this case, its painfully obvious.
Then assumptions such as "it's Signal's mission to provide private messaging in the face of government overreach" suddenly become very dubious.