The pairing state file seems worth exploring. Thank you!

I’m using Gnome and whatever it uses under the hood for bluetooth. Restarting the daemon might be worth exploring though, at least to see if behavior changes.

That’s exactly the route that I was going. Although I’m back at work today and noticed that even a usb-connected wired headset has some issues. I have to do some more testing, but the only way I’ve been able to make things work seamlessly is by logging out with my private user entirely while I’m working :/

If you ever have to go back to bash, it supports it as well. In my bashrc:

bind '"\C-p":history-search-backward'

That’s ctrl-p, but I’m sure the up arrow is possible too.

My pixel was the USB-C phone that I was referencing above 🙈

I’m glad it works for at least some folks :)

Somewhat unrelated, but I recently realized, my micro USB devices have never “worn out” the way my USB-C devices have. I remember having to rig things up, just to get one last charge into my USB-C phone that stopped holding a connection to the charging cable. It actually made me nostalgic for the “plug it in, flip it, plug it in again, realize you still don’t have it and flip it again” approach 🤷

I’ll give this some attention when time permits because this does not make things clearer, lol.

I’ll start with what a field is and a complex field 🤞

Ok, everyone but me seems to get it, so I’ll ask. I get everything but the last bit. What does “isomorphic with the complex field” mean? I think I know what isomorphic means from some dabbling I’ve done in category theory.

wait, I finally get it. 10x developers write 10x lines of code. They’re just verbose AF, so that many more lines of liability. That’s it. Yeah, I’m not 10x.

I’m not saying, reduce lines of code in favor of readability, but that’s a different argument. I’ve heard it said that no abstraction is better than the wrong abstraction, but are 10xers opting for no abstraction all the time?

For non-U.S. Americans, I hear “whom” all the time here, like not a day goes by without hearing some co-worker use it.

I agree though languages change with time.

Most grammar nazis I know would probably go with “Not I”

Grammatical case. I can only really describe it in German. If you take the sentence “The boy gives the man the apple”, it’s “Der Junge gibt dem Mann den Apfel”. “Der” is masculine form of “the” in the Nominative case. “Den” is the masculine form of “the” in the Accusative case. “Dem” is the masculine form of “the” in the Dative case. It’s subject, indirect object, direct object, respectively, if you know verbs. There’s also the Genitive case, which I didn’t go into here.

The reason it’s not sufficient to talk about subject, direct object, and indirect object though is because the grammatical case also goes beyond just a noun’s relationship to a verb, it’s also affected by prepositions. If you take the German sentence “I’m driving with the Man, but without the Apple” (I know, sort of a silly sentence), "ich fahre mit dem Mann, aber ohne den Apfel. The prepositions here, “mit” and “ohne”, dictate that the two masculine nouns in the sentence get the masculine form of “the” in the Dative case and Accusative case, respectively. The reason why some prepositions dictate certain cases isn’t clear to me. I just have the tables memorized :D

Most grammar nazis I know would go with “whom” for the object of a preposition.

It goes up to 11.

That says more about the fat-ass Texans than the Germans

big ben, parliament!