I find it really weird that something as simple as the basic functionality of nextcloud seemingly can't be implemented in a stable and lightweight manner.
Nextcloud always seems one update away from self destruction and it prepares for that by hoarding all the resources it can get. It never feels fast or responsive. I just want a way to share files between my machines.
There are other solutions, I know, but they're all terrible in their own way.
That's exactly not the thing, because nobody broke the contract, they simply interpret it differently in details.
Having a null reference is perfectly valid json, as long as it's not explicitly prohibited. Null just says "nothing in here" and that's exactly what an omission also communicates.
The difference is just whether you treat implicit and explicit non-existence differently. And neither interpretation is wrong per contract.
It can, but especially during serialization Java sometimes adds null references to null values.
That's usually a mistake by the API designer and/or Java dev, but happens pretty often.
No.
Interoperability is only required, if you have a significant market share. Apple does not have this in the EU. iMessage specifically doesn't fall under this regulation, since hardly anyone uses it.
And since Apple plans to publish an SDK for their intelligence anyway, you can't really regulate them for being too closed.
So either that's a purely political retaliation, or their "super privacy friendly" services aren't as privacy friendly as they claim.
Maybe you were just at a bad school? Quadratic equations are mandatory in Germany even for the lowest level of graduation.
Until my Abitur (12th grade) I learned about equations, stochastics, integrals and derivatives, vector stuff, etc.
That's software development for you. Why is that weird value there? Because some guy, at some point, had checked for that and somehow it's still relevant.
I know of a system that churns through literally millions of transactions representing millions of Euros every day, and their interface has load bearing typos (because Germans in the 90s were really bad at the Englishs).
If you actually want to learn maths (that is, if you're not just venting), you could try to ask for help in dedicated math or teaching communities.
The problem with teaching stuff you know, is to put yourself in a position of actually not knowing anything. I'm a software developer and had to teach some apprentices a few years ago, and it was really eye opening to me to see how much assumptions about the apprentice's knowledge I made even though I thought I made my explanation "basic".
It's quite possible that all the tutorials you've read are either for literal children, so they just don't work for your adult brain, or they're intended for adults and assume too much.
On a personal note: how did you get into that situation? Were you home schooled?
Using the Rabbit R1 instead of generic ML was too obvious.
SSH, OpenSSL, LibreSSL, pf ...
There's not a single web server without some code from them. Every single phone, every Linux machine, and probably even Windows (citation needed) ships with some of these tools.
And you didn't hear a thing, because the OpenBSD guys just sport a smug smile and don't care about our plebian fame.
I don't think it's validation in the sense we normies felt. For regular, sane men it's more of a fitting in and being desirable kind of validation, women do the same in that age.
For him and other powerful people (but also some regular men) it's a power thing. Many powerful people are narcissists, and they live constantly under the dissonance of illusion of grandeur and inferiority complex. Essentially forcing their will onto others is a way to mitigate the latter.
Especially in terms of "legally not rape" charges, even the average man has to face terrifyingly few consequences. So many women report assaults, unwanted aggressive advances and "not exactly consensual kinds of intercourse" without the men ever facing anything serious, not even stigma. Banging blackout drunk girls is a sport for some people.
Nope.
If there's a clear definition that there can be something, implicit and explicit omission are equivalent. And that's exactly the case we're talking about here.