For a purely semantic sake, you're probably right. But for a colloquial sake, the term "valid" here, doesn't mean "legally valid" or "medically valid", but instead means "emotionally valid." For some people, confirmation is therapeutic enough to help. Also "diagnosis" doesn't exclusively mean "medical diagnosis". There are many definitions to the word, and in a medical sense, it usually means what you're describing. But "I think I have ADHD" is a diagnosis. Not a medically valid one, but something that might help me get through the day sometimes. And if that's all I need, then it's emotionally valid.
Being told "your self diagnosis is not valid" to some people is the same as being told "There's nothing wrong with you." (Because most people aren't working on a strict legal medical definition of "diagnosis") Emotionally validating your assessment that something is wrong can very well be what drives people to advocate for a medically valid diagnosis.
Also, saying "You don't have ADHD unless it's diagnosed ADHD" is wrong regardless of stance on self diagnosis. If my arm is broken, it is in fact broken, even if it hasn't been diagnosed. Undiagnosed issues are still issues. Too many anti-self diagnosis claims come across as saying that if you don't have a diagnosis it doesn't exist. At most you can claim "You don't know for sure you have ADHD unless it's medically diagnosed"
As with all things, a self evaluation is a useful "what do I do next" step.
Wow. I did not know about the Torx security thing. It looks like the ifixit kits come with a torx security instead of a regular torx, so I never even noticed when I took my controller apart to replace a shoulder button. 🤯
Streamers use a capture device to stream on a second computer, with an extra GPU so the stream doesn't interfere with their gaming performance. Don't want stream encoding to hurt your framerate.
I've never heard of anyone using a multiple device setup for internet bandwidth reasons (im sure its happened, but I would have to believe it's generally not the reason people use multiple devices)
You're right, it's very likely he wasn't intending to use a slur. But it seems to me like a lot of the reporting is "he didn't mean to disrespect people!" when that's not the case. The pope's intentions were absolutely to disrespect people, just by his actions, and not by that specific word. the specific phrasing he used to do so doesn't really matter.
Written by someone with little understanding of the requisite material
The requisite material for the topic at hand is "dating a person who clearly thought there are implied social contracts at play, and attempting to make it work out anyway"
OP is asking about "How do I fit into society?" not "How should society function?"
I agree with you that a lot of implied social contracts are bullshit. But also they exist. Until you have had that talk together to figure out the relationship, there has to be some assumptions. People don't always have deep "what is this relationship" 2 minutes into the first date. Assumptions are not always bad.
Your stance is that the assumption is "I have no obligations until I've agreed to them." This is itself merely an assumption to make and not just "fact" of some sort. The vast majority of society has the assumption of "The relationship IS an obligation to some degree based on context." I'm not saying which assumption is "right," I'm just saying how it works for most people.
If I'm in a relationship where I'm committed enough to refer to the other person as "my partner" then I'm going to err on the side of not hurting them, regardless of who is to blame. If I can prevent the other person from being hurt just by working along with their assumptions until we can have a conversation where we make things explicit and there are no more assumptions, then why wouldn't I do that, unless "being right" is more important than my partner.
if you didn’t commit to spending the entire evening with her on her birthday
Bad news. This is sound logic, but in NT world, there are all sorts of implied social contracts. Dating someone defaults to "yes you DID commit to spending the evening with her on her birthday, unless otherwise discussed to opt out".
Not everything needs to be spoken or written down. If I walk into a restaurant but there is no sign that says "please form a line to place your order," I'm not going to barge to the front and begin ordering, because "form a line and wait your turn" is understood to be how society functions.
You are absolutely not obligated to follow the implied social contracts. And you not obligated to know all of the implied social contracts. But you also don't get to take the moral high ground on the situation.
she doesn’t have a right to blame you for her hurt
A healthy relationship doesn't have blame or a scoreboard or anything like that. It REALLY doesn't matter who is to blame. Try to win an argument by saying "Well you dont have the right to blame me." It will end more relationships than it will win arguments. If you value the relationship, you want your partner to not hurt regardless of the source/blame. The hurt happened and all you can do is figure out how to prevent the hurt going forward, which will often be by communicating and setting expectations.
Just inviting them to come with isn’t fair to your friend that wanted to hang out with you... You can always make plans with your partner on another day
Or you can make plans with your friend on another day. it is generally considered the "socially acceptable" thing to prioritize someone on special days like birthdays. Even if you have only give a bit more priority on someone's birthday, I would think that a partner already has enough extra priority that "I will spend time with only you" is not an unreasonable request. It's also not clear how long OP has been in this relationship. Based on the miscommunications, probably not long. If it's a serious relationship, then giving your partner extra priority sends the message that you find the relationship serious. Otherwise the message is "you are a priority person in my life and this is a priority day for you, but this other person is even higher priority still."
Asking them how they feel about you going ... understand that you should be able to go do things with your friends and you shouldn’t have to ask permission.
If you ask someone how they feel, and express they would be hurt, but you do the thing anyway, then you are saying that you don't care if you hurt them, and "Well i didnt know it would hurt you" is now a lie. Your options are to either not hurt them (by talking through the situation until it doesn't hurt them, or simply not doing the thing), or hurt them. But if you hurt them willingly, you are the one doing damage to your relationship. If you don't think they are being reasonable, then you may be in a toxic relationship and should end it. If you just don't care about their feelings, then you are definitely in a bad relationship and should end it. Asking isn't about "permission", it is about communicating that you value their input and their feelings.
Life is complicated, so "priority" doesn't mean that something is the only thing that matters but it does mean that it should factor into your decision making.
Definitely make sure you think through all the physical security implications of having your house automatically unlock in any scenario.
Have the house auto unlock when getting home on a bicycle, sounds convenient until, as you point out, they could get stolen and now the thief has a convenient way to unlock your house. So you would not want that.
You would definitely not want the house to STAY unlocked when something like a tag is in range. If your kid is home alone, you want them to be able to re-lock the house (or in general, you want to be able to lock your house while the kid is home).
Whatever solution you wind up with, you are going to be trading physical security for ease of use (and complicated fun task). Be safe. Make sure the tradeoffs are actually thought through and worth it.
This has been the thing for me. I get really bored and lose focus when doing all the obvious repetitive stuff. And the obvious stuff is the stuff I find copilot does best. For anything that requires thought I'm engaged. Those are the fun parts of the job. It lets me do more of the fun part.
The one major downside that I've found is that sometimes I just want to tab complete a long variable/function name, and because of copilot i dont have "old style" tab completion anymore. (I could definitely still handle this myself, but i haven't)
edit: this all to say that I don't use copilot to write code that I don't know how to write, I use copilot to write code that I've written 1000 times before and don't want to write again. Copilot does a good job of looking through all the open files for context to help make sure the suggestions actually fit into the codebase's pre-existing style.
I prefer chain texts when I am engaging in a conversation. It feels more like natural conversation. As a sentence is out of my brain, the recipient has it. Sometimes the thoughts are fully organized, there's just a linebreak between them, and it's just a formatting distinction. But there are differences between "sending a text message to relay information" and "having a conversation via SMS"
The obnoxious part is the constant vibrate/beep per incoming message, but Android has a "minimum time between notification sounds" config option though, I imagine Apple does too, so that has never really bothered me either.