Sure, why not.

You have very simple fume extractors. I don't get why it would not be worth it just because you rarely do it. It's like wearing a respirator mask when using a grinder. Or ear muffs when drilling or sawing.

Perhaps you could try addressing the arguments instead of irrelevantly focusing on Harvard?

To be fair, if it doesn't matter, shouldn't put "Harvard Professor" into the title then

As the OP, it matters when it comes to the post title (copied from the video without any editorializing) but does not matter when it comes to actually discussing the points mentioned in the clip.

That "Harvard Professor" is David Malan who has been running "CS50: Introduction to Computer Science" course at Harvard (https://pll.harvard.edu/course/cs50-introduction-computer-sc...) for a while now. So presumably he has good experience on the pedagogy needed in the teaching of CS and what they believe is necessary in the curriculum.

As a person who has been doing C/C++ for over three decades now, i can confirm his points and add the following for an even more compelling story;

1) C is the interoperation lingua-franca of the software world due its defacto "standardized" ABI.

2) C allows you to program all systems from Desktop/Server to all Embedded MCUs (simple or complex). This is huge since there is practically no limitation on what you can attempt.

3) C allows you to work at all levels of software viz. Applications, OS/Compilers/System Software, Bare-Metal. This too is huge since there is nothing really hidden from you thus allowing you to move up and down the software stack based on your interests/needs.

4) Finally, there is a ton of C code out there which people still need to understand, maintain and extend as needed. Many of them are critical infrastructure viz. OS Kernels, Databases, Web servers, Automotive/Aviation systems etc.

As I understand it, you're an investor in Featherless. It's good to mention that.

I don't understand. What's special about being able to charge your phone? Can't you do that anywhere you have a power socket?

I think you would need something that tracks relevant per cable metrics over time to see if it is degrading. That one just says yes/no, but maybe yes/no starts to flicker around its end of life?

Nod - that's what I was thinking. I expect it's often the connectors that deteriorate so perhaps moving them around while plugged in would tell me. Seems like a useful tool to have around.

i've used a treedix tester like this. the edition with many led lights, not the one with a screen.

wiggle the cables around to see if and when any of the lights flicker, indicating a bad or broken connection. i've found a few bad cables that would intermittently fail.

That's great. Thank you for the feedback - I ordered one just now.

Looks like the paid/pro version does this.

> Cable history

> Add a cable, give it a name, and WhatCable records how it performs over time, with a verdict per cable.

Your sibling comment is right. It stands for Levelized Cost Of Electricity.

You could try using arguments instead of an appeal to authority fallacy?

It's not as clear cut as you describe it here. In the other old thread you linked there was no real consensus if this should be considered a backdoor or not.