> Tehran agrees that it will neither produce nor acquire nuclear weapons.
Of course they do. They have always said they don’t want nuclear weapons while pursuing them relentlessly.
> Iran’s nuclear programme, uranium enrichment activities and mechanisms for handling its stockpile of highly enriched uranium would be negotiated within 60 days of the memorandum and addressed in a final agreement.
If that is still to be discussed, then what have they been discussing so far? That has always been the main issue.
I’m an Iranian in my 40s, and the regime and Western countries have been negotiating for most of my life. I remember being in high school when the first nuclear talks began, and ever since, it has been a never-ending series of talks, understandings, and plans without any real conclusion. I remember there were cases when they talked for weeks, and their main achievement was agreement on the time and place of the next negotiations. Today’s “deal” is no different. No party is releasing an official text; apparently, it’s not a real deal but a memorandum of understanding outlining a plan for further talks over the next 60 days. Another 60 days on top of the last two decades.
And all of these have only bought time and money for the regime to continue its nuclear ambitions, terrorism plans, and oppress the people of Iran, including almost daily executions of innocent protestors during the last few months as these negotiations went on.
The truth is, it won’t be possible to solve this issue with this approach. You can’t get a snake to sign a document to agree not to be poisonous anymore.
Richard is amazing. I briefly worked with him while volunteering on a W3C text layout requirements document. He cares deeply about writing systems, and he has been doing so much valuable work in this space.
Very cool. I really like the idea of implementing higher level features as extensions on top of a smaller core. I wish real scripting languages like this were more common and in use. Lua comes to mind when thinking about a generic scripting language, but even that is not that widespread.
My guess is that he was consulting their lawyers during this. IANAL but it might have been a crime if he did not leave the group as soon as he was sure it was real. He keeps mentioning that he was not certain this is real until the first attacks. After the first attack, he could not continue this argument.
Thank you a lot. Great work. I know it’s still experimental, but over time it will have a big impact on developer experience and will simplify the development workflow for a lot of projects.
Genuine question from iTerm users: which of its many, many features do you use most and find most valuable? I have always had it installed, but Terminal.app from macOS seems to have been enough for me. Maybe because I’m always using tmux anyway and that covers some of iTerm’s advantages. But I’m still curious about iTerm.
I’ve been a Fastmail user for about a decade (I just checked; wow!) and am very, very happy with them. I wish more companies were like them. The service is very reliable, the product is great, their support is amazing and very kind. A lot of companies get distracted by big pivots and hyper-growth ideas, while companies like Fastmail focus on doing their main job very well.
I second this. lsp-mode was the main recommendation when I started looking into LSP for Emacs, and it was ok, but I switched to eglot a few months ago and I’m very happy with it. It’s more Emcas-y, IMO.
I think they (Iranian government) recently changed the rules and don’t stamp the visa into the passport. Not sure though, you better do a little research about it.
In MacBook Air, I had to keep the bottom part with my other hand, otherwise it would come up too. My very old MacBook Pro didn’t have that problem, but its screen would wiggle a little after I left it. These new ones are the only ones I’ve seen that don’t have any of those two problems. Of course, I have only seen some of Apple’s laptops, so this might not be a new thing.
Not in how I see design. Design should be obvious and easy to use. Assume I would design an app so perfect and beautiful that a settings icon would ruin its look, so I would hide it under a swipe. That’s not good design. Dieter Rams’ “good design is unobtrusive” is about that. So is the famous Steve Jobs quote: “Design is not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works.”
I gave two examples of Apple’s recent designs in my first comment: one looks great but is bad, IMO, and one is great. I’m just saying that there are too many of the first category in the last few years. Does that make it more clear?
They talk about the “disappearing” iPhone. That’s the kind of thing that every designer talks about and strives for: putting the user and product first and making the design an invisible servant of that. But, unfortunately, Ive’s design have been the opposite of that in the last few years. Most of his designs are about design.
The Steve Jobs Theatre is a good example. It’s very impressive and looks great. But it serves the designer more than the user. It’s so “perfect” that staircases would ruin it, so they are invisible. In the last iPhone event Apple employees were standing there to show people where are the stairs. That is not good design. It’s a conference venue but they had put temporary desks outside for information/cards/… because it does not have a place for that. Even bathrooms are hidden because they would ruin the designer’s great vision. The whole thing is very impressive, but it’s bad design.
Edit: I’m not saying that Ive’s a bad designer. Not at all. He’s one of the best. A great example from Apple’s recent works is how the lid of the new MacBook Pros opens without the keyboard part moving up. And you can do it with one finger. But, unfortunately, there are so many examples of bad design that looks good.
Where the hell did you get that number from?