You know, I remember in middle school learning the art of Google for research purposes and being amazed that I could find almost any information I could want in minutes. It was also in that time that I first encountered the “Let me google that for you” website that just takes text, shows a mouse moving over the Google searchbar, pastes the text, and then returns the search results. Seeing that made me realize I’d feel a fool if it had to be pointed out to me that I could google the answer to a basic question.
So to see someone acknowledge that they could take one minute to find the answer to what an acronym they don’t know, from a more reliable source than an internet stranger (like the gpt answer above), and then outright refuse to do so on the basis that the answer should have already been spoon-fed to them is frankly bizarre. I sure didn’t know what RDT was when I opened the thread, but just to make sure I wasn’t crazy after reading the threads here I typed ‘rdt coffee’ in my search bar and in less time than it took you to write your comment I had the answer.
I need to understand, what is the process behind your thinking here? Why do they need to explain a 20 year old coffee term in a coffee community that takes less than a minute to learn the basics of if you do the thing you think you shouldn’t have to? I’m really trying to understand without letting judgement seep in, I’m just at a bit of a loss here.
If a large chunk of their production is exported the market could be influenced to reduce the amount they can export, such as expanding US chip production to replace Chinese imports. Then their industries would be less profitable and have to spend time scaling down to meet the lower demand, which would also reduce their capacity to develop.
I think that fits between one extreme and another?
Yeah, but behind that wrong side is a valid person, and without a discussion you’ll never know how they ended up on that wrong side. Without knowing how they got there, you’ll never be able to sway them away from the wrong side and they will continue to be wrong.
I think everyone has something worth saying, but in the majority of cases I just don’t have the time, energy, or patience to get to that something.
It’s silly to gripe about someone watching a movie for so long, but not because the person watching needs something to fill their life. If that was the only justification needed you could justify owning a yacht because it’s the only place you could get away.
The real argument is that running a television is not very energy intensive, and being on the grid means the energy it does use is produced at a scale where the environmental impact is drastically reduced.
I’ve had to reread your second to last paragraph multiple times because it just feels bonkers to go from saying that people enjoy television to saying people might kill themselves without it. What basis does that have in reality? I tried looking into it a little and the only search results regarding suicide and lack of tv discussed suicide coverage on tv and whether it increased suicides. Searching for whether people are happier without tv had a lot of anecdotal “yes” articles and articles relating to a study about teens being happier with less screen time. That seems fairly inconclusive and may just mean there’s a gap in the research that could be filled, but I think you’re really underestimating the average person’s ability to live without television.
Company A was created independently. In a sense, it owned itself. After a while Company A decided it needed capital or a close business partner. Company A told company B "We will sell you a 49% share of our company for capital and close business relations." Company B accepted. Now what happened to the other 51%? They're still with Company A, so we can say that Company A owns shares of itself.
On the contrary, I’d argue energy mostly meets many of the philosophical criteria for God.
Omnipotence: It literally is what drives stuff to happen.
Omnipresence: It is present to some degree in all things everywhere for all time, though you could argue about vacuum.
Omniscience: See omnipresence, although having knowledge implies some level of consciousness, which is pretty debatable. My psychedelic phase tells me that it’s totally a thing, but I’ll be the first to admit that’s not a rational argument.
Omnibenevolence: I don’t understand why God needs to be good.
If the author no longer has passion for his OSS project, and isn’t being paid for it, why is he still working on it? Why should he feel responsible for companies building their processes on a free piece of software without guaranteed support? Why the heck is he sacrificing sleep for something he claims not to care about anymore? It sounds to me like he’s not living his values.
If compensation for volunteer work is mandated, it becomes less volunteer work and more of a part(or in some cases full)-time job. My understanding is that a core pillar of open source software is that anyone can contribute to it, which should make it easier for contributors to come and go. Based on the graph shown it would take more than a full-time job worth of money to meet his demand, which seems unlikely in any case, and it’s time for him to go. Either someone else will volunteer to pick up the slack, the companies using it will pay someone to pick up the slack like the author mentioned, or the software will languish, degrade, and stop being used.
I don’t see how any of those outcomes suggest that people need to be paid for the time they voluntarily give. I could get behind finding better ways to monetarily support those who do want to get paid, but “how could it be easier to pay OSS contributors after their passion is gone?” is a lot less provocative of a headline.
Imagine you have a big board on your front lawn where people can come to write stuff and respond to others on the board. This board is an instance.
Your neighbor has their own board, which they have “federated” with yours. Messages from your board can show up on their board, and people there can write on those messages same as ones native to that board.
You can federate with them so their stuff shows on your board, or defederate if you don’t like the people there.
Anyone with the ability to make a board can have one federated with other boards to make a really big web of boards, but to a person looking at your lawn’s board it feels like one big one.
This is not a delay. They are updating the window from "Early 2023-24," which the article states is likely anytime this past year to the end of their fiscal year at the end of March to... "Q4 2023-24" which ends at the end of March. So there's no real change to when it could release by (yet).
There can be some interesting things. In my campaign setting there is an age requirement of 450 to be on the ruling council of the largest nation, so it’s almost entirely elves with the odd gnome or other long lived race. It’s been interesting thinking of how society would be shaped around such an institution.
Even in most adventures I’ve been in or heard of they usually doesn’t last even a tenth of the 50 years in the meme so the differing life spans don’t really factor in.
To each their own, but I think removing the differing life spans makes the races more flat and indistinct.
A “land of milk and honey” is a place of opportunity where one hopes to find a better life. I first heard the term in the song Nancy from Now On by Father John Misty. After looking it up because of this post, at some point in the Bible Israel is described as a land flowing with milk and honey multiple times.
LAN is short for local area network and only one letter away from land, so a church naming their wifi “Lan of Milk and Honey” crosses the similar sounding technical term related to the wifi with a biblical term related to the church, thereby achieving a pun. I hope that helps you get it!
What do you think the point of differing denominations is if not to have modified/different and, as the person you responded to said, more right ideologies?
There is a chapter or two from a book by philosopher Derek Parfit that tackles the transporter issue pretty head-on. It draws what I feel to be a pretty compelling distinction between the continuity of your conscious mind, referred to as Relation R, and the personal identity that is lost when using the transporter. He then asks which is more important. Worth a read if this stuff interests you.
There's a book series based on using cloning and memory storage to accomplish very similar things called Undying Mercenaries. The main difference is instead of copying someone and keeping the copy on ice they have cybernetic implants that send engrams of their mind to remote storage, and if they die a clone can be rapidly grown and those stored memories saved to it. It gets pretty schlocky as time goes on, but it's a fun premise to play around with.
You know, I remember in middle school learning the art of Google for research purposes and being amazed that I could find almost any information I could want in minutes. It was also in that time that I first encountered the “Let me google that for you” website that just takes text, shows a mouse moving over the Google searchbar, pastes the text, and then returns the search results. Seeing that made me realize I’d feel a fool if it had to be pointed out to me that I could google the answer to a basic question.
So to see someone acknowledge that they could take one minute to find the answer to what an acronym they don’t know, from a more reliable source than an internet stranger (like the gpt answer above), and then outright refuse to do so on the basis that the answer should have already been spoon-fed to them is frankly bizarre. I sure didn’t know what RDT was when I opened the thread, but just to make sure I wasn’t crazy after reading the threads here I typed ‘rdt coffee’ in my search bar and in less time than it took you to write your comment I had the answer.
I need to understand, what is the process behind your thinking here? Why do they need to explain a 20 year old coffee term in a coffee community that takes less than a minute to learn the basics of if you do the thing you think you shouldn’t have to? I’m really trying to understand without letting judgement seep in, I’m just at a bit of a loss here.