I always wondered why a grocery store in the eu, for the love of their users, won't just drop money usage. Just give out food for free, except for alcohol.
I (and presumably a lot of other people) don't believe that it's possible to build a system that can dynamically determine when it's acceptable to steal focus with low enough error rate to make it better than a total ban.
Seemingly you disagree and believe that such a system is possible. Is there anything preventing you from implementing it to prove the doubters wrong?
If computers could read thoughts and 100% reliably determine when the user is done with their current task and would like to switch back to the other application, then yes, it would definitely make sense to implement the functionality you're describing.
In the real world, where it's impossible for the OS to distinguish between the "You stopped checking in the first 0.5 sec while the app took 1 sec to start" scenario and the "you're still busy with the current task and don't want to switch to the other app yet" scenario, the safe choice is always to not steal the focus because the cost of switching too early is significantly higher than the cost of not switching.
OpenAI exec scaremongering about "A nonliving, invisible, dangerous, and infinitely self- replicating agent escaped from a Chinese lab" mere 4 days before https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48997548 is hilarious
You've quoted the rules which forbid parking and driving in the bike lane and then went on to confidently make up the part about stopping and dropping people off.
With -π to π radians you get absolute error of approximately 4e-16 radians. With -180 to 180 degrees you get absolute error of approximately 2e-14 degrees.
Even though the first number is smaller than the 2nd one, they actually represent the same angle once you consider that they are different units. So there's no precision advantage (absolute or relative) to converting degrees to radians.
Note that I'm not saying anything about fixed vs floating point, only responding to an earlier comment that radians give more precision in floating point representation.
Wait this doesn't make sense. Yes you'd get smaller absolute error in radians, but it doesn't really help because it's different units. Relative error is the same in degrees and radians, that's the whole point of exponential representation. All you're doing is adding a fixed offset to the exponent, but it doesn't give you any more precision when converting to radians
Ra is great, and so is Fine Structure but they are both significantly longer than Antimemetics. Most people wouldn't read a massive novel publishing on some guy's personal website.