And, not to put too fine a point on it, being extremely proficient will give you a massive competitive edge in the industry.

I'm a true believer in the drug's seventy year safety record when given as a prophylactic for malaria prevention millions of times and over the counter in many places.

If you don't wear it on your face.

It's a disease spread by exhaled droplets. How the heck could masks _not_ work? Why has common sense, as an acceptable way to obtain knowledge, died in the general public?

I used to evangelize integer cents but then I worked on a few systems with floats and the world didn't fall over.

Consider linting tools in your build.

Nothing is particular about the US here, humans are omnivores whose optimal diet for health contains both meat and plants.

If your profit has to come from sales, but a lot of theirs comes from locking you into a maintenance profit, isn't this a big problem, when they can lower their sale prices much lower than yours?

See what happened when printer manufacturers figured out it was more profitable to sell you ink than printers, even taking a loss on the first sale. They all had to do it once one did. Everyone knew the printers were getting cheap and terrible, but still very few wanted to pay 2x as much on the initial purchase.

With games and other software as well, we see more and more monetizing with ads, DLC and subscriptions, even though most gamers would probably say this had made games worse overall.

Which set do you think would suffice?

I'm troubled by the top-down nature of what is decided to be beyond debate vs not: it feels like it is leading to a scary kind of authoritarianism I don't want.

For fun, I'll throw you a specific plausible hypothetical. If an app has a gender identity field, and a user enters "Apache Helicopter", should this be treated as valid data or not?

In fact, even debating whether I should be able to debate it could damage my career. I believe this widespread use of silencing tactics, by implicit threat, has gone too far.