3.4 Triangulate your view with believable people who are willing to disagree.

Software should never force something on the user. The user should always be the one in complete control. You can warn of the risks, but let the human decide what is best for the human at this exact moment. For example, they may just need to look something up. It may be an emergency. They may have private tabs that would be lost if they restarted now, and they need to wait until a better time.

It's no different than Windows or other OS updates.

See also: https://askubuntu.com/questions/1398179/firefox-restart-required-how-to-disable

It's sufficiently different. Plays on other names should be permitted.

What does "are not considered when deciding whether to use 401 or 403" mean exactly? What exactly should not be considered, and what exactly should be considered instead? In other words, how did someone arrive at the conclusion that "if you have your own roll-your-own login process and never use HTTP Authentication, 403 is always the proper response and 401 should never be used."? Why is 403 okay to use for non-HTTP authentication, but not 401?

Oh, I think I understand the difference now.

They should have said:

Authentication by schemes outside of (not defined by) RFC7235: Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Authentication should not use HTTP status 401, because 401 Unauthorized is only defined (by current RFCs) by RFC7235: Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Authentication, and has semantics and requirements (such as the requirement that "A server generating a 401 (Unauthorized) response MUST send a WWW-Authenticate header field containing at least one challenge.") that simply don't make sense or cannot be fulfilled if using a non-HTTP authentication scheme.

403 Forbidden, on the other hand, is defined by the broader HTTP standard, in RFC7231: Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Semantics and Content and RFC7235: Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP/1.1): Authentication.

In conclusion, if you have your own roll-your-own login process and never use HTTP Authentication, 403 is always the proper response and 401 should never be used.

See also my comments in https://hyp.is/p1iCnnowEeyUPl9PxO8BuQ/www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7235

It depends what we mean by "incorrect"/damaged "credentials ("ticket")...

A. If they are invalid or incorrect in the sense that we can't authenticate them as anyone (as it sounds like you mean with "incorrect" or "damaged") (they're not a user in our database or the password doesn't match a user in our database), then you should actually use 401, meaning that the client can/should try (again) to authenticate with different credentials.

B. But if by "incorrect" you mean (as it sounds like you mean with "you cannot even go through the airport security: when they check your ticket, it will be refused") that the credentials were valid enough to authenticate you as someone (a user in our database), but that (known( user has insufficient credentials, then correct, it should be a 403 forbidden.

It's even easier to explain / think about if you just think of 401 as being used for any missing or failed authentication. See:

• https://hyp.is/3fuPiHooEeyZc5cn4Q1uXg/stackoverflow.com/questions/3297048/403-forbidden-vs-401-unauthorized-http-responses
• https://hyp.is/oxI0uHonEeyZYvdQFZIEUQ/stackoverflow.com/questions/3297048/403-forbidden-vs-401-unauthorized-http-responses
• https://hyp.is/pB2XuHomEeyax28Y6vxcOg/stackoverflow.com/questions/3297048/403-forbidden-vs-401-unauthorized-http-responses

I disagree with this statement for multiple reasons, however, even from a scientific standpoint this is faulty. The rating was very poorly done as the sample that they polled was not up to good standards

The meaning:

An original recording, film, or document from which copies can be made.

makes more sense to me. Why would they have meant the other meaning?

You could say the same thing about Array#sort. It can cause an error if elements of the array aren't all of the same type/shape. Just make sure it's safe to use first, and thenArray#sort, Array#sum, Array#average, ... are all quite handy and useful to have on Array class.

But that's exactly when/why you'd use it: to make self refer to the instance! Just learn that and you'll be fine. You can still access locals from outside the block. And if you need to access instance variables/methods of a different instance, then sure, it's probably a sign you shouldn't be using instance_eval here.

It looks low-res, so how can they claim it's HD?

That's a tough one. I can see it both ways.

.

Why not just make this document empty (besides a link) and link/redirect to the canonical version?

That way it is impossible for them to disagree.

Maybe, but we also have to consider individual differences for the tolerance or capacity for either having one's views challenged, or being willing to challenge others' views in public/classroom contexts. Also, there may be a difference between what we hear students say publicly and what they really feel.

Of course, it depends on the context of the course content--if there are correct and incorrect answers or processes or procedures, such conclusions are valid and desirable.

Disagree— This and the previous three paragraphs are gross and reductive, assuming the worst of society, that everyone wants to be lazy and have their houses burglarized if they think their insurance will payout. Would fit in well at the GOP convention...

I disagree with this premise- I don't think putting animals into zoos and observing them there, is a benign act.

others did not think it was okay for her to depict the image bc she is white and it is ab a racial issue (she cant relate to the feelings bc she is white)

-on the other hand she was trying to compensate for their sadness and be empithetic?

Is a 9 and 11 percent difference in expert and novice performance really able to make a conclusion? Correlation does not equals causation.

It was very difficult to find an interpretation I disagree with, so I'll be super nit-picky here! I disagree with this because for a group of people so devoted to their religion (and although there still lay a pattern of male figure-heads and assumed authority), I think the rabbis are actually genuine in their beliefs and application of their beliefs to their student's problems. I think, rather than seeing it as wanting to "establish their authority" - we can picture it like how a mother would try and reprimand her daughter not be careless with a boy when drinking. It's not because the mother wants to establish authority, but because the mother might've experienced a mistake similar - or witnessed someone make that kind of decision and its consequences. Therefore, they wish to prevent their daughter from making the same mistake. In this case, the rabbis, in terms of their principles and what they believe is right according to their "world," describe their students' problems in a way that fits according to that world - not for some power-hungry desire, but because they apply their culture (what they've embodied) to their students (the students who ought to be following that very same culture).

But what are good and bad? In this case the bad conscience is coined by the "good people", but there is no universal good or bad. This phrase is objective.

I don't believe it is a necessity to listen to all and everyone's opinion, it is in fact a set back to all but the one. Even if the 99% is wrong and the 1% is right, what the 99% believes is right becomes the truth.

I'm not sure how I agree with this phrase--myths aren't necessarily true and lives are, right?

I really disagree with this one - I think over-use of subfolders makes it really difficult to work with a file-system.

I don't understand this view of romance as a cultural system. Overall example using romance seems weak compared to AA chapter.

I don't understand this - labeled by others after acting "inappropriately" AFTER drinking? I feel like the label is more contingent on the act or habit of drinking, rather than only after... Guess this speaks to the disagreements and lack of a clear definition of alcoholism

Disagree for the block. I don't know where to begin with how much I disagree with this and don't want to present ideas that offend people, so I'll just leave it at that

I disagree with this to an extent. When it boils down to it, yes, it is the student who puts forth the effort or the will. However, a good teach can give the student the tools they need to succeed in sport or knowledge. No pressure, Professor Boyle.