looks pretty interesting, but what’s wrong with textbooks or wikipedia?

First off wikipedia to me is used to give an intro to a topic, or to remember something that I’ve learned before and forgot about. It’s not something to learn a subject/topic rigourously as you would in a lecture.

Secondly, there are textbooks out there that are completely free, such as libretexts. All categorized in order, from arithmetic to analysis courses like number theory, real analysis, numerical analysis, complex analysis, etc…

for what it’s worth, i do like the system. I’m just concerned on the rigor that after a certain threshold (eg, multivariable calculus) it won’t be easier to make engaging assignments. The analysis courses I was referring to, there are a lot of theorems a lot of proofs and that is tricky to make engaging (hence why most people don’t take analysis courses). If that is the progressional path you are going towards – higher level STEM classes – there’s already plenty of textbooks that cover it and are more information dense.

one final point, all of this costs money. getting people to peer review is a tricky process in academia alone, the “brotherhood” network (as far as my research is concerned) isn’t affiliated with a university unlike openstax or aforementioned libretexts which plenty of universities contribute to. There needs to be funding one way or another. How are you getting the necessary funds to prove to everyone that by taking this course will demonstrate that you know <subject>.

I like the ambition, but to make a system like that is a tricky (impossible) process to do without some funding. even the free and open source textbooks like openstax and libretext, don’t have that certification it’s a liability on the person reading it to get certified. MIT has a similar system with their opencourseware, and yet that still costs money to be “certified” in said specific course. The logistics of this project is near impossible without funding which explains my skepticism, on how you would maintain it to be free.

I would do the loop instead the if condition, where letter != ‘Y’ or ‘N’ generally speaking, using while(1) for x86_64 programming is bad practice, specific cases like embedded system design is where it’s more commonly used.

I think having both the indentation and the braces surrounding code is much better than just indentation or braces, since it removes any ambiguity of what code goes to what if, for, or while loop/condition. we already have to memorize precedence to define ambiguous expressions. Why have another set of rules that could otherwise be prevented with braces and indentation?

yes, and I couldn’t really care what it was intended to be used for. clearly I could still use it as a WiFi utility posts installation.

As per the arch wiki it says “iwd is a wireless dameon for Linux written by Intel.” “The core goal of the project is to optimize resources utilization by not depending on external libraries.”

the point of why I’m using it is for that exact reason. it does the same thing every other WiFi GUI/TUI out there. unless there is a vulnerability/security risk of using iwd, I couldn’t really care less about the other options, even if that means manually configuring enterprise and public networks.

hippity hoppity this meme is now my profile picture

reactions check out.

you do know he was an engineering major?

mangoWM. my workload requires a lot of resources like vivado/vitis. the more resources I have available the better. I’ve no where near customized my WM (FFS, I’m still using iwctl to configure WiFi), that said it does run great, using about 560 MB on idle.