I like it, i for int easy to remember. I also use i, j, k as u it vectors and remember at what depth of a multidimentional array in working at.
I like it, i for int easy to remember. I also use i, j, k as u it vectors and remember at what depth of a multidimentional array in working at.
I was going to post more or less similar rant, but hey thanks for doing it. I second this @OP you hear this? This post just sounds like you don’t understand infinity that well.
It’s a word movie, how do you not know this? /s
Nothing I would ever publicly admit I guess. Other than maybe general anxiety.
And that link somehow doesn’t open well for me, something about a bracket I believe
Yeah i think cult mentality is the problem. If someone doesn’t want to pay or cannot pay, it’s their choice/circumstances. If they don’t like sync’s pricing and wanna stick to FOSS apps, it’s their choice. I don’t like to see people pushing around others for their choice of what they think is the best.
To specifically say I was going to smile, but I choose to not.
Missing article was here It didn’t contain much other than dates it was filed and plaintiffs information. Which is a standard practice anywhere.
In July 2024, ANI filed a lawsuit against Wikimedia Foundation in the Delhi High Court — claiming to have been defamed in its article on Wikipedia — and sought ₹2 crore (US$240,000) in damages.[14][15][16] At the time of the suit’s filing, the Wikipedia article about ANI said the news agency had, “been accused of having served as a propaganda tool for the incumbent central government, distributing materials from a vast network of fake news websites, and misreporting events on multiple occasions”. The filing accused Wikipedia of publishing, “false and defamatory content with the malicious intent of tarnishing the news agency’s reputation, and aimed to discredit its goodwill”.[17][14][18][19]
The article is still up, Wikipedia calling ANI biased, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asian_News_International
So not really sure, why the massive outrage. Removing intricate details from ongoing lawsuits is standard practice.
While the lawsuit by ANI demands that editors who made the edit claiming ANI as govt mouth piece be identified, Wikipedia hasn’t done it yet and the article is right about setting a dangerous precedent if high court forces Wikipedia to reveal the names. But at the same time article is biased and has misleading information such as > In an unprecedented move, Wikipedia removed the page from its platform on October 21.>
You can see some well noted examples of articles being removed before from Wikipedia here . So there is clearly precedent for removal of articles. I used love vox a decade ago, but now I see these half truths/partial stories are a commonplace and I’m happy to have ditched vox now.