Honestly their main downside. Especially that big piece that you just cannot break into smaller pieces.

Is the joke that nobody knows what it says on the blackboard?

Author handle to hopefully make them easier to follow (and at least notify them that they’re on Lemmy): @[email protected]

No, I was already convinced that relying on colour alone is insufficient. I still think they can be useful helpful if they don’t rely on colour alone.

True, there are exceptions (that’s why I keep saying most), and I think the pattern is more common on web than on desktop. (Though I think Gnome also compensates a bit with their boxed lists as an additional affordance.)

Note that I am 100% on your side in saying that there are annoying toggle boxes that are unclear. In your image, I can only tell that the second is probably on because the right-hand side is usually used for the on state in LTR locales. But they can be better, e.g. with an on/off label integrated. Ironically, GNOME has a toggle to enable this:

Well, I’d encourage you to keep an eye out; I think you’ll find that the majority of controls on the web behave as I described. And I think that’s a good thing, too: it’s far quicker and easier to be able to deduce behaviour from the control you’re handling at the moment, than having to scan the complete context. And especially if e.g. you’re visually impaired, the latter can be a major hassle.

(And indeed, the other controls you mention almost never apply instantly, so their behaviour is still predictable. When they do, they’ll often still have some other affordances to indicate that they do apply instantly.)

I was trying to make the point that the way a control looks gives you some information on how it will behave, because software has generally been consistent with associating those looks with those behaviours.

So if you see multiple options with a circle in front of them, selecting one, then selecting another will usually deselect the first one.

On the other hand, if those options have squares in front of them, selecting one, then selecting another will usually result in both of them being selected.

And in both cases, usually they will be part of a form and will only take effect when you submit that form using a button.

On the other hand, something that looks like a toggle usually takes effect immediately on toggling.

Of course it is technically always possible to have each of those behave like any of the others, but you will be breaking conventions if you do so. Styling is an affordance to inform the user about the behaviour.

The Louvre has two paintings with that name it seems, but I’m guessing it must be this one (this is the other one).

And then there’s Toto, who actually have a million hits, but each of them feels like it must be some band’s one-hit wonder, until you find out that it’s another Toto song.

I might be a little more informed because I’m Dutch, but Vermeer is fairly well-known, and e.g. The Milkmaid and View of Delft are, I believe, other fairly famous paintings of his (albeit less famous than The Girl with the Pearl Earring).

Vermeer might have been a pupil of Carel Fabritius, who was a pupil of Rembrandt. The interesting thing about Fabritius is that many of his paintings got destroyed in an explosion (that also killed Fabritius), and only about a dozen remain. Which I think is also mind-blowing: this potential important link between two famous painters might very well himself have produced such wonders, but we’ll never know.

(If you’re ever in the area, I would highly recommend a visit to the Mauritshuis in The Hague. And if you like reading, The Goldfinch (referencing the Fabritius painting) by Donna Tartt is the novel that got me into all this in the first place.)

I mean, they can, and they can also be made to be mutually exclusive - but it’s better to use radio buttons in that case. If that pattern is used, there’s not really a good way that a checkbox will take effect immediately beforehand, or whether it will require submitting a form, except scanning the full page to look for such a button.

It’s nice to be able to know that they take effect immediately though, instead of needing to click a submit button.

Yeah I think that’s fair. As far as I know, it’s also mostly been used for detection, not patching, and possibly it’ll be better at exploiting than at patching.

No there was actually something in there about avada kedavra being bad for the soul (or something like that), though I’m not sure if that specific bit applied just to the spell or to killing in general.

I don’t think these are all Mythos, but it’s more than 2 fixes: https://infosec.exchange/@tomrittervg/116443139069130293

The author seems to put a lot of stock in the whole “the blue team has access to these AI tools that the red team doesn’t currently have access to” argument

I didn’t read it like that. I think the point was that the red team had an edge over the blue team (by being able to spend a lot of effort on a single exploit), so when both teams have access to these same tools, it’ll be more of an equal fight.

It’s making fun of people getting all worked up about their (extreme) idea of feminists. Usually, they’ll also picture these straw feminists as not wearing bras, so presumably they’re lurking at the training bra section to prey on young children about to get their first bra.

Staring straight into @[email protected] comics’ Galbor month.

That makes sense!

That sounds like exactly what I meant; where the GPL is viral on the project level, MPL is viral on the file level. So if code, under MPL, is added to a file, that whole code becomes MPL.