Thanks, that makes sense

There is a ton of external wiring and plumbing connecting modules, so it isn't as easy as undocking one. Think about all the power and cooling connections that have to route to the truss, plus all the data lines between modules. The US segment and Russian segment are inextricably linked with all those external connections, and potentially even cold welded together at the mechanical interface.

So was the purpose of the modularity only to allow for it to be built piecemeal or is this congealing of the modules due to one-off repairs that accrued over time?

I remember seeing a concept for a Boeing space station that used inflatable modules and I thought at the time it seemed kinda like a evolution of the ISS's modular concept. But your explanation make me wonder if a modular space station even makes sense (outside of the initial building phase)

Maybe this is a stupid question, but why does discussion of the ISS's age always end up as an all-or-nothing debate? It's modular so can't we treat it like a Ship of Theseus and replace the modules one at a time?

I said its one of the reasons behind the network effect, not the network effect itself. github can offer more freebies, which attracts more users, which makes it more attractive to other users and for existing users to stick around.

Which is one of the reasons behind github's network effect.

the main reason is because people don't know about it

But you know about it now and you're still arguing against it.

it's an extra thing to remember for little benefit the "only" do a really useful thing that lots of people want.

The benefit you see in those tags is the same level of benefit that users who use accessibility features get from output and other semantic tags. But your argument seems to boil down to "I dont need accessibility features so i don't care about enabling them for ppl who do". That's very disappointing and continuing this debate seems pointless so i'm gonna stop here

Expecting all devs to test their sites with screen readers is unrealistic.

I disagree with this but its not what we're talking about. You said output is useless and I'm saying its obviously not. There's zero cost to using it instead of a div so the only reason not to use it is to purposefully screw users who need accessibility features.

All those other elements give some benefit apart from accessibility

Maybe for label but p and h1 - h6 only differ from div in styles, which is another argument in my favor. If you're willing to swap a div for one of those for visual users, swapping a div for output should be just as easy of a change.

Yes exactly. Which is reason enough to use it, unless you purposefully want worse accessibility.

You could make the same argument about p, h1 - h6, label, etc.

Nearly every web app that uses an input calculates and displays some result based on those inputs. It's clearly useful.

They don't need "powerful ammo". They're already rounding ppl up and illegally imprisoning them. And they plan to keep going further; ICE is on a hiring spree right now and just got a huge budget increase. They don't need valid excuses to be jackboots because they'll just do it anyway.

Refusing to use available tools to fight back is ridiculous. There is no "what if" here. They're already doing it and they've made it clear that want to do more

If the system flags the wrong person and a witch hunt ensues, it will validate every right-wing persecution complex there is.

Could you explain your worry further? To me, the problem with AI facial recognition is that a government or company using it has all the power. If they get a false positive, the wrong person gets hurt with no recourse. Civilians can't do anything detrimental with a person's identity that's not already illegal. Cops have been identifiable since they were catching slaves and outside of organized efforts (which this is not) there's been no issue with thatt.

Also, it seems trivial to add a step after the system returns an identification that checks if that person is actually employed by ICE. If not, oops it got it wrong; no harm, no foul. Even if it's wrong after that step, then what? I've seen no evidence that ICE agents are receiving anything beyond verbal harassment in the first place (outside of protests, where any hypothetical harm is random and not based on identity)