What your talking about is called a clipboard manager, and there are tons of them out there. All with varying features.
6xpipe_
joined 1 year ago
MIT gives YOU more freedom
After years of debate about licenses for my own software (that only I use...), my philosophy has been boiled down to this: MIT for libraries. GPL for programs.
This way, other developers can freely use your library, and your program remains free.
“Who even are the Gideons? You ever met one? NO! You ever seen one? NO! But they’re all over the world putting bibles in hotel rooms.”
Hey, everyone! Get in here! We're building a bikeshed!
I’m sure there’s some obscure key bind to go directly there
It's just Cmd+Shift+H (for Home). The shortcuts for many of the most common locations are extremely intuitive.
Cmd+Shift+A(Applications)Cmd+Shift+D(Desktop)Cmd+Shift+L(~/Library)Cmd+Shift+C(Computer)
Same with Python. I use a combination of the platformdirs and xdg libraries.
XDG gang, rise up!
Also, I know that this community and dot-files in general are Unix based, but this holds true for Windows development as well. You should be putting app files in the users' %APPDATA% directory, not their user folder. It's probably even more important since Windows doesn't autohide dot files.
The links from that post and top comment point out that that initiative was dropped. It got mired down in bikeshedding from hundreds of opinions and SO eventually just said, "Fuck it."
The MIT announcement thread was edited with the cancellation announcment:
Update: January 15, 2016
Thank you for your patience and feedback. The changes proposed here have been delayed indefinitely - we'll be back later to open some more discussions.
The top comment from your link points out the current license:
TL;DR: Source code on SO is still licensed under CC-BY-SA.
And CC BY-SA is the only license listed on the official help page.
- Content contributed before 2011-04-08 (UTC) is distributed under the terms of CC BY-SA 2.5.
- Content contributed from 2011-04-08 up to but not including 2018-05-02 (UTC) is distributed under the terms of CC BY-SA 3.0.
- Content contributed on or after 2018-05-02 (UTC) is distributed under the terms of CC BY-SA 4.0.
You’re supposed to do that anyway. Code on SO is licensed as CC BY-SA, which requires attribution.
The article doesn’t list the infected site. So, if you want to keep yourself safe by avoiding it, well… fuck you, I guess.
Edit: just skimmed through the original Group-IB report and they redacted the name of the site. Not the article’s fault that millions of people are still in danger to this malware.
They’re also the company who mainstreamed the software subscription model.
It used to be that only services required subscriptions. Applications would be a one time payment. But, Adobe converted to the subscription model and because they hold a monopoly over the design space, people/companies had no choice but to go along. Once they were successful, every business in the world decided that they also wanted that sweet monthly payment and now software licensing sucks.
I refuse to even pirate Adobe products on principle.
TL;DR Fuck Adobe, use open source.