It's not that bad since it sets an expected order. I always start reading c++ files from the bottom up.
And between functions?
Unlike c++, in #rust, function and struct declaration order does not matter.
What is the best practice then? From lower-level (no deps) to higher-level (all deps) like in c++? Or the reverse so that you start reading a file from the higher level code? #asknostr #devstr
Yes. Bought one 4 years ago, still intact and I don't use anything else.
Regarding rfid-blocking, I know contactless payments don't work if the cards are inside the wallet.
I've been told that my streams somehow are better and with less delay than BBC on tv for some reason. They will come
I'll also take that bet
21M cap broken 😂
Not to mention wages are fixed costs whereas revenue is variable and uncertain.
Ey nostr:npub1xnf02f60r9v0e5kty33a404dm79zr7z2eepyrk5gsq3m7pwvsz2sazlpr5 as promised, here is a first POC for the new Tor engine library 😄 https://github.com/ZeusLN/zeus/pull/2268
You're a hero
He should raise capital and start his own business selling those weird rings then.
No one is forcing him to accept those work conditions.
Wtf why everything always goes wrong with England. Cursed team
That would actually be more meaningful politically
That actually makes total sense since you almost always need some sort of personal savings for runway before getting seeded or breakeven.
Unless you had a golden crib, most people in their 20s don't have that level of savings.
nostr:npub1xnf02f60r9v0e5kty33a404dm79zr7z2eepyrk5gsq3m7pwvsz2sazlpr5 I'm seeing this on 0.8.4 (9) with nostr:npub1getal6ykt05fsz5nqu4uld09nfj3y3qxmv8crys4aeut53unfvlqr80nfm custodial wallet. I can actually access the wallet if I'm quick enough, so I think it's working. It flashes the shorter message for a split second if I wait on the longer error. 
First things first: they should pick a less scary colorscheme for the error pages. Being blasted with a big red screen of death is not nice or soothing.
That's actually zap.stream codebase, I only shared it because I was familiar with it. But since they share the same author, a similar thing might have happened.
I don't think keyword muting should apply to how mentioned npubs get resolved. I disagree with the proposal.
But the issue that I mention is still real. If I mute npubA and npubB mentions npubA, I shouldn't see that note. Nothing to do with literal keywords and names.