> This might have been intended to be a pun, but it just comes across as absurdly rude and not at all in-keeping with your "DE&I" background. If you're that of

> This might have been intended to be a pun, but it just comes across as absurdly rude and not at all in-keeping with your "DE&I" background. If you're that offended over a single line, get a thicker skin. It wasn't even criticizing you but your choice of example. > crap in a hole and dump water on it with a chamber hanging above. Some toilets have flush buttons. Some have multiple buttons. Some have levers. Some have levers above you. Some are electronic and require a button push in a completely different place. Some require you to manually get and dump water. Even the act of dumping water has differing UX, and has UX which has certainly changed over the years. > And, please don't shit into a bidet, I hope you're referring to the optional additional thing that some people have added to their toilets as an extension, which doesn't change the core functionality at all of the toilet. It's different UX which in most high end modern day toilets is integrated into the toilet itself. The point is that the UX of modern day toilets is only the same in that there's a hole over a chamber. The hole may be at seat level or on the floor, there may be buttons or levers or many other things. Old toilets would also certainly not have had such wide holes -- another UX difference. In your Notepad vs VSCode example, the thing you describe as a "toilet" is more akin to the UI element which shows you editable text. Your basic toilet is Notepad, a modern day toilet is VS Code. The only thing even remotely similar about them is that they both have a text editing UI. Just like the only thing in common with toilets is that shit goes into a hole. Everything else is different.