Windex007 @ Windex007 @lemmy.world

Posts

3

Comments

1,099

Joined

2 yr. ago

I don't know why we're so obsessed with using posture and tone to infer criminality when we have perfectly good forehead slope ratios to achieve the exact same thing.

It's been about 36 hours?

Maybe we're using an old version or something, but code blocks still don't expand horizontally to fill the available space, so we just get a horizontal slider bar.

or opened in a separate viewer for easier reading.

Yes, that's my beef. If I need to juggle content to external text editors to read them, then IMO it has failed the categorical imperative of the tool.

Edit:

Back to work Monday morning:

Collapse all side bars, you get 89 monospaced characters. Approximately 2/3 of the horizontal screen space is reserved for empty space.

On a 4k monitor you can still only get about 80 characters of monospaced font per line, because of the "negative space" fetish UX designers have.

Something dead simple like posting a stack trace, and then having someone able to, you know, read it... It's just not something teams really does well.

I can understand how the tooling probably does a ton of stuff that corporate users want (integrating with calendars, tons of access controls for spaces for important people to talk, etc) but for a dev working primarily with a handful of other devs and qas, there is a feature set mismatch. I can't begin to tell you how badly I don't give a shit about 99% of its features.

As soon as they toss one name, they acknowledge there are a list of names. As soon as there is a list of names, you gotta release the whole list.

Neither party wants that.

What is a first edition holographic charizard worth? What is the utility of that card?

Things are worth what people are willing to pay for them.

You can't eat a Bitcoin for sustainance. Or hammer a nail with it. You can't do either of those things with a pokemon card either.

I feel like you get this, based on your post... But you still are hung up by it.

Bitcoin's attractive utility for many is that you can transfer them pretty much unimpeded by any external entity. Like a government for example.

Like, hypothetically, what if you wanted to send a million dollars to your family back in, I dunno, Hong Kong. Do you think you can put that in a suitcase and hop on a plane? Do you think your bank will just send that wire? No. Government needs to know about it.

You can send a million dollars worth of Bitcoin, though. No problem.

What about if the government decides to seize your assets, for whatever reason? Maybe you were a little too loud about your support of Palestine and a man child president decided to make an example of you? They can raid your home. They can seize your bank accounts. Can they get your Bitcoin? Nope (if you're actually holding it yourself)

What sets Bitcoin apart from other currencies is that it's very government resistant. You CAN hold it yourself. Not digitally in a bank. Not as bills under your mattress. It cant be seized.

How much SHOULD Bitcoin be worth, given the utility it provides? No idea. But it's something.

Trever Moore's follow-up "Supersize Me, With Whiskey" was better.

I see it ALL the time, across MANY domains.

Language, music, golf, programming, driving, competitive gaming, etc etc.

It's not necessarily a bad thing; it's WAY more effort to push for improvement. Once you've gotten to the point where your skills are serving your needs, is that what you want to invest your finite energy into? Maybe not. God knows I'm not actively trying to improve on every skill I have. Very few. Most of my things (music, games, sport) are just to have fun. If you're having fun you're probably not really improving, and that's ok.

But when people lament that they've hit a wall on a skill, in my experience it's this effect, MUCH more than any other.

I think if OP reflected on their already MASSIVE achievement of becoming functional in another language, they'd likely conclude that their skills rapidly increased up until the point that they had a functional level of the skill, and then hit a plateau once they subconsciously began expending less active effort on improvement.

I think when people are learning some new skill, eventually they reach a proficiency where they stop actively working on improving. Instead, they'll transition from "improving the skill" to "applying the skill".

Practice does not make "perfect". Practice makes permanent.

I mean, in this case it's what it's been fed, which is roughly the internet, which is roughly a giant heap of garbage.

We, collectively, are the programmers, and we fucking suck.

To be fair I have infinity more confidence in the system you just described than whatever tech bro disruptor was going to pitch

You jest but that's roughly the story of the "discovery" of Machu Picchu

Gonna pull out my hair splitting razors for a moment...

OP didn't say more intelligent, they said smarter.

Can one get smarter? Does "smart" conceptually include the quanity of acquired information? Does the quality of thought impact the ability to acquire new information? Does smart include the concept applying knowledge appropriately? Is the ability to do that informed by the quality of thought?

We might have different definitions for a lot of these words, but I think I gotta say "yes" to all of them.

I'm not this guy so I can only guess their experience, but the more time they're able to spend in a mental state that maximizes the quality of their thought processes, I would expect it would help them learn new things and more effectively apply that knowledge. I'm contented to say that counts as smart.

So ya: More think good make more smarter that guy.

Based on this I can only imagine they must have full throated support of the green line which would reduce intra-city traffic to allow for greater available capacity for provincial traffic.

I'm so far beyond the point of caring how people look at me, and so far past the point of wanting to talk to anyone.

What you've just described would be considered total victory.

My strategy for overcoming this is to congratulate myself out loud so they know not to answer until I'm done.

Not a loophole. Ambiguous and subjective criteria are designed to give decision makers cover to ultimately do whatever they want, unbound by the rules. When the system permits, the system is flawed.

It's not even close

This.

This was the standard for years. Matchmaking kinda killed it.

There were 3rd part server browser services that could fill the gap, though. I wanna say GameSpy or something was a popular one in the late 90s

This is why as much as I appreciate the philanthropy of the ultra wealthy, it's NOT a substitute for taxation

Yes, we can accept that we're all multifaceted. We contain multitudes. We can love some things about a person, and hate others.

Difficulties really only arise when we choose to make the broadest judgements into the narrowest categories. The whole must be good, the whole must be bad.

I hate how brutal he can be. I love how brutal he can be.

I think people are too obsessed with assigning a binary state to a whole human. It's downright offensive.