To understand this further, let's consider a more advanced modulation scheme. Instead of just having two states (high and low) to represent binary bits, imagine we have four distinct states: high, medium-high, medium-low, and low. These states can represent combinations of bits as follows: high = 11, medium-high = 10, medium-low = 01, and low = 00.

In this scenario, each state transition represents a symbol, and since each symbol can represent two bits, the symbol rate (or baud rate) is half of the bit rate. If you know the symbol rate and want to determine the bit rate, you'd multiply the symbol rate by the number of bits per symbol. In this example, you'd multiply the baud rate by two.

Most signals rely on techniques beyond simple voltage differences though to transfer information, and that's when you delve into the world of RF theory. Instead of a discrete voltage, a sine wave is used at a particular frequency. The amplitude of the sine wave can be adjusted just like we adjusted the voltage on that line. If we want even more symbols, maybe 0000 to 1111 or bigger, we can introduce another variation to the sine wave called phase. Phase of a sine wave is just shifting it left or right, but could be visualized as two people on a race track. If they start a race from the same line and run at the same speed in the same direction, they're in phase. If one of them starts a quarter of the way ahead from the other and they both run at the same speed in the same direction, then he's a quarter phase shifted from the other.

That adjustment of phase and amplitude falls into a broad category of RF modulation called QAM, and it's used in more than RF between two radios. It can also be used over Ethernet or PCIe busses.

I could go on rambling for a long time on all this, but hopefully this helps answer your question.

Independent from the side you take on this, this decision was made by the judicial branch in the context of (hopefully) the constitution. If you disagree with the decision, there's a process (albeit a long one (on purpose)) to change our system, but that process resides in the legislative body, not the judiciary.

I encourage folks from both sides of the argument to keep that in mind.

[1]: https://docs.gitea.com/next/installation/comparison

I didn't think that was actually mathematically proven yet. Was some proof accepted recently that makes that quoted sentence true?

All git repos end up in that folder - it's basically my project folder. Before explaining more, I should specify that this setup works well for me, but I could see how others may not agree with it.

Let's say I have 2 projects called prj1 and prj2. In that case, I would have the following directories:

/home/eric/repos/prj1 /home/eric/repos/prj2

Both of those would be git repos. Now, let's say that both of those repos rely on a shared repo, which I'll called shared-repo. In that case, I would have this:

/home/eric/repos/shared-repo

Then (and here's the part that probably won't sit well with folks), I just reference the parent directory from either prj1 or prj2 to access shared-repo.

Down sides: I'm forcing a hard coded directory hierarchy and directory naming. Up side: it's simple. If symlinks worked just as well on Windows as they do on Linux, I could just create a symlink in both prj1 and prj2 that points to my shared-repo directory and that could solve this whole mess too.

Having said all that, submodules have worked for me in the past, but I use them so rarely that I always need to look them up - so I've gotten in the habit of keeping things simple for myself and just doing things the way I mentioned above.

Having said all that, business does boil down to a lot more than just profits. Those are important but so is the livelihood of the employees, along with their expertise and tribal knowledge. I know those feed into profits, but I'm thinking beyond that. It's my job to ensure that my employees are able to take home the pay they've earned. Often, I have to put on more of a social worker hat and help out some of my employees with personal issues. That may be loaning a car at no charge, or giving a low interest loan to buy a house. In the past, I've paid for weddings and funerals. All of that goes with the job of being an employer. That doesn't mean every employer has to do those things. I'm fortunate to be in a position where I can help out in those ways, so I take advantage.

I think this highlights the point I'm trying to make: too many people focus on businesses trying to maximize profits and they push to enforce rules to help out the little guy. If businesses do that, then that's too bad. If you work for one of those businesses, then talk to your manager about it and if necessary, find a company that shares your outlook. Not all businesses are like that though - in fact, a lot of them aren't. Most businesses really do try to be fair and understand there's competition out there that may be trying to lure in some of your star employees.