killeronthecorner @ killeronthecorner @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

1,327

Joined

2 yr. ago

The original comment I replied to made a definition of evolutionary success and I made a counter-definition. I'm not sure what conversation that you're referring to before that. There was only one other comment above it in the chain and it had little do with defining the evolutionary success of chickens or what that might entail.

If you're perceiving an agenda where there is none while also not understanding the point being made then, not to be rude, but thats a comprehension issue.

It's possible I'm explaining it poorly, but I've run out of ways to approach this so I can't offer you anything more.

That's the one, and you're right, it is currently a rebrand but ultimately the same product.

I think having separate apps is the wrong way to go for their "integrate everything in one place" philosophy, over the longer term. I'm eager to see what they do with it next.

They've just done the same with a calendar app that I forget the name of. They then rereleased it under their own brand.

They appear to be on an unspoken mission to challenge Google's suite of apps, so I'd hazard a guess that email tech is a part of that puzzle (along with calendar)

Agreed. I've been trying to explain to someone recently why rebasing and force pushing their feature branch has no benefit when we use a squash commit strategy for merging to main.

Again, tools are not blame, but when combined with a lack of understanding and accumulated "git dogma", it can be quite disheartening.

You're implying that I'm making a case for evolution achieving some sort of perfection, and linking that to a definition of success, which, again, isn't what I said.

If you can't have an honest conversation about it then I'm not interested. I don't doubt that you understand evolution, you've said enough to demonstrate that, but you certainly do not understand the point I'm making.

And billions was an autocorrect.

Same. I mostly use sourcetree to do quick self-reviews and to discard lines or hunks before a commit.

But I've also grown very weary of having to dig people out of git messes they've made with sourcetree and the likes.

Visual clients aren't to blame for that, but they contribute. So many times I've asked "and what git commands did that run?" only to receive a dumb stare as a reply.

I think it's exactly that. They are targeted at bootstrapping projects and prototyping and are, frankly, very good at that job.

Not sure on your use case, but I've been using Hetzner for a while and it does what it says on the tin.

Then call it reproductive success instead of dishonestly causing it evolutionary success. And I didn't state that evolution requires or doesn't require anything, you brought that up - we're talking about whether it's considered successful, which is a philosophical question.

Artificial selection is not a reflection of a species' ability to survive in the natural world and to me that is not an example of success over the longer, think-billions-of-years, term.

Can you describe where natural selection occurs in a battery farming process?

Oh my

Twice that many chickens are killed a year. It's not what I'd call a roaring success in terms of evolution.

Brain damage

Following appeal, Facebook published an open letter to the supreme leader, stating: "If Ayatollah you once Ayatollah you a thousand times: you're banned!"

That sounds hard and discord already has my retinal scans

1. Big beats are the best
2. Get high all the time

I just wanna chat over the internet using some sort of relay. If only there were a solution.

Yes you're correct, this was the point I was making.

To elaborate: could be 100s of times in a codebase, even 1000s, being executed in tests on local machines and build servers 100s of times a day, etc. etc.

"Mike, we need you to take the tongue this time"

rand will be called every time true is used, which could be hundreds of times for all we know