AVIF _is_ AV1 in the HEIF container.

(.heif is sometimes used as a file extension generically, but HEIF is itself a container that can support various payloads.)

This hasn’t been true in over a decade.

It's also, inevitably, the newest people who are often the best at fixing basic documentation — because they're the ones who don't already know it.

Yes, the curse of knowledge. The new person only has industry jargon that everyone else will have and so they will describe any new concepts that way instead of with the circular logic the team has established. And that is often something I have to explain to the new person when they look dubious at the notion that they have any right to be touching the docs at all. They have more right than just about anyone.

It takes a really good teacher to be able to explain as easily to an intern as to a principal, and often the intermediate people have to take the beginners aside and reframe your explanations anyway. Whether you witness it happen or they do it where you cannot see, it happens.

> The peculiar properties of CJK characters and the philosophy (apparently the Japanese did not like Unicode's tendencies towards Aristotelian essentialism) under which they were implemented in Unicode probably singlehandedly forced unicode to expand beyond the BMP....

Note that Han Unification has a history predating Unicode, and the Unicode work very much followed on from that.

The most notable is CCCII, developed in Taiwan in the early 80s, and then standardised in various places.

That's not to say that it hasn't been controversial (it has!), nor to say that it hasn't caused problems (it has!), but it's also unfair to say that it's just Unicode doing its own special thing.

There’s a decent amount of public health research that suggests that annual physical exams don’t actually have a large impact on health.

In the US case specifically, I always wonder how much of the benefit is just “here’s a free appointment with a doctor once a year”.

It's not free. If you bring anything up, you will be charged. I know because I've paid hundreds of dollars for "free" physicals that way.

It's free if you don't bring up things that should technically have been a dedicated own appointment.

The idea behind physicals is they're considered preventative care... catching problems early, often before there's any overt symptoms. For example, checking your cholesterol and A1c levels before they progress to heart failure or diabetes.

Once you're showing symptoms, you've left the realm of preventative care and it's now diagnostic/treatment for a established issue.

(ACA only provides 100% free coverage for visits that are 100% within the "preventative care" box.)

I feel like SF has been full of frequently inscrutable billboards as long as I’ve been coming here — at least a decade.

It’s maybe got slightly more extreme recently, with an even larger percentage of them being inscrutable to me as someone who both works in tech and has a decent grasp of current industry trends.

I’ve never really got it — if even I don’t know what you’re advertising (or often, who is advertising!), how does this help your sales?

Keep in mind that marketing is not just trying to teach you about someone you're unaware of, but is also in part about assuring you (and your boss) that you're about to make the right choice when their sales team is already talking to you, and even in part about ensuring that you (and your boss) continue to feel confident that you did make the right choice (or alternatively make you have doubts about having picked the competitor) after you made the buy.

Making their sales peoples job easier, in particular, can be a lot cheaper than getting the marketing on its own to sell someone on you. They want you to go "oh, yes, FooBar Inc, I recognise that name" instead of your reaction being "who?!?".

A lot of marketing without calls to action fall in the latter two categories. In that case they don't need to tell you who they are. They just need you to notice that they're there enough that they seem like a player that is a good choice. You don't even necessarily want to come across as caring too much about explaining who you are - you just want to portray the silent confidence of someone buyers should already know.

(I have no idea whether the specific billboards you're talking about succeed at this)

And I get it — when the name of FooBar Inc is on the billboard. When there’s neither a product name nor a company name, which seems to be happening more and more often, I just don’t get it!

In the SF tech scene they talk about this -- startups say they will put up a billboard for one CTO.

I don't even think that's an exaggeration. I watched a YouTube video about a startup that wanted to land a major client, figured out the CTO's commute, and put up billboards along the way.

Then they called the guy and he told them "I see your ads everywhere." They had an in.

The economics likely make sense when a contract is easily worth tens of millions of dollars. They're trying to create the perception that they're established in the mind of one person.

I sort of look at it as putting a flag on the moon. Billboards are how tech companies claim ownership of SF and the tech sphere, any consumer influence is incidental.

I remember seeing an advertising exec talk about spending more money in the area the execs lived so they felt the impact of the advertising, regardless of how effective the spend actually was. This is likely more of the same - making the investors and C-Suite get warm fuzzies.

More ego than practical.

https://github.com/web-platform-tests/wpt/commits/master/aci... shows the history of the web-platform-tests copy of WPT, which has mostly followed Hixie’s earlier updates to Acid3 by simply commenting out assertions that no longer match what specs say.

I’d still love a way to be able to rewrite commits at merge time, via Actions or otherwise.

The most obvious case is something like adding a Reviewed-By/Signed-off-by trailer based on reviewers, but there’s also a decent number of big projects that want more semantically meaningful commit identifiers (think more revision, in a numeric sense).

It seems like making merges async should make it a lot more possible to implement that!

And enough of the time you can just match based on subject line, similar to how fixup/squash commits work with autosquash.

There’s enough ways you can match up commits, with plenty of prior art in this space.

Being based on a microcontroller and having limited RAM, I do wonder how good its ePub implementation is, especially in terms of CSS, but also in terms of dealing with larger (XHTML) documents.