Without a lot of discipline it is very easy to end up with a css with lots of unclear and hard to guess effects. Eg consider the case of <A type=1><B><A type=2></A></B></A> where A and B are complex templates. Any selector with the " " operator on A risk expanding to the inner A even if it was intended only for the outer. Similarly a :has selector might catch a descendant of the wrong element.

@scope fixes a lot of this, but it is a complex problem. With tailwind you mostly have to worry about inheritance

> Any selector with the " " operator on A risk expanding to the inner A even if it was intended only for the outer.

Then <a type=b> is potentially a <c>. Consider a small refactor?

This problem was solved a long time ago with CSS Modules.

I prefer almost anything to CSS modules, so this bike shedding topic is probably very subjective.

Even ignoring all non renewable consumption in growing the corn to be turned into ethanol it is still going towards an incredibly polluting infrastructure.

While each solar panel is a small step towards more and better electrification

I enjoyed the pragmatic historical definition of OOP given in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo84LFzx5nI where essential it can be seen as subtype polymorphism

The premise of the article is the desire to avoid accidental collisions, especially from newly installed system binaries.

In such cases you might get errors like sl being both a version control system and the steam locomotive

Probably prefix notation would work better, but I suspect that there would be a stronger effect from predictable and reasonable declinations/suffixes/prefixes at a grammatical level.

IIRC the methane is produced at launch site with considerable pollution

Sure but if it was a good idea we could do it on earth too and datacenters could stop gurgling a city worth of water

This should depend on the frequency of the switching, if it is every few seconds it should behave sorta the same

Another important part is that a lot of microwave recipes specifically state to leave the food in the microwave for a period of time after it's done cooking, and often stir it after that. Almost no one actually does that.

Most people think they should be able to put food in, nuke it at full power for as short of a time as possible, and then immediately shove it in their face with no consequence and we all know that doesn't work yet most of us will keep doing it anyways.

Yes but I've never seen it be every few seconds. Every time I've seen, it's quite prolonged.

Neither it means that McDonald's should aspire to be a chef

Sure, aspiring to mediocrity at a cost to others is a choice.

The paradox is about the set of all sets that do not contain themselves, or a theorem that such a set does not exist.

In the context of the paradox you need to call it a set, otherwise it would not be a paradox