You’ve cut off some important context here:

Nobody wants to watch a 30-minute video for something that can be summed up in a 250-word article.

I’m fine with watching a 30-minute video if that format adds value. It doesn’t here, just gimme a write-up.

First of all, the article talks about JavaScript, not Java. Secondly, who writes “Java” in all caps?

This comment, officer, this one right here.

CSS now is… a tad more complicated than it was 25 years ago, FYI.

There’s a difference?

I’m curious as to why you’d want to? The audio quality is pretty atrocious due to the compression they use, and—last time I tried, anyway—all their channels are full of obnoxious interruptions for self-promotion.

Ugh, proprietary components are the worst.

Can’t give much advice in the way of case design/airflow, but props for trying to reuse old parts rather than just junking them and getting new stuff. Very creative work.

Have a flashlight

Preferably a headlamp, if available. Keeping your hands free is really helpful.

+1. It’s like beef but leaner and more flavorful.

“performance”

“I feel the need…”

(I don’t even have to finish the line.)

That’s the one I remember lol

edit: that and, “I’m not detecting any leaks”

I thought it was “So long and thanks for all the fish”?

“mistakes”

Turns out you’re actually right, as there were similar experiments performed on rats, with similar results, so I redacted my comment.

Still feel like it’s not necessarily a good idea to apply the lessons to human society, but… yeah, depressing outcomes.

edit: see response to OP, below

FYI, it’s very important to note that these are mice, not rats, which have drastically different social dynamics. I don’t know if this experiment has been repeated with rats, (and I rather hope not) but I wouldn’t be surprised to see a very different outcome.

Humans are very different animals, though, and we should probably be cautious about projecting these results onto society.

Bwahahahahahahaha

Yeah, I think this is the best option. It sounds a little weird at first, because we’re so used to hearing it the other way around, but it makes more sense if you think about it.

Some computer nerd friends and I came up with a solution for this:

Computer architectures typically provide separate instructions for “logical” and “arithmetic” bit-shifts. The details as to why aren’t important, but we can borrow the nomenclature.

When referring to “tomorrow” in the sense of “when I wake up from my next sleep cycle”, use “logical tomorrow”. When referring to “tomorrow” in the sense of “after midnight tonight”, use “arithmetic tomorrow” (or “chronological tomorrow”, if you really want to be pedantic).