Some people see “free stuff”, and assume that it’s now open season on wasting OP’s time.
It’s a good way to kill any enthusiasm. Imagine your kid made a spaghetti portrait as a gift for you and instead of just accepting it you asked, “but what exactly did you do differently from all kids on the block?”
Why? Why ask for this from the creator?
If someone can create new software and offer it for free, they should not also be expected to also create a comprehensive analysis of what other people did and list of differences.
Just take it or leave it, it’s that simple. No need to act as if you’re trying to waste some door-to-door salesman’s time.
Edit: I expected some downvotes but not that many.
To my defense, the question in this thread is “you could elaborate what exactly you did different than all the others”. Look, I’m not a native English speaker either but I feel we could agree that is still pretty far away from simply being curious about design choices or “what led you to create this” sort of exploratory question.
I might have overreacted, though, so sorry for that.
Does no one else see that Musk is becoming a cliche´ bond villian?
…
Does no one else see that Musk is becoming parody of a cliche´ bond villian?
FTFY
I could describe myself in similar terms as you described yourself; basically a nerd who can also program my way out of a paper bag (and maybe a leather one).
To me the term “tech bro” always meant someone between Elon Musk and some low middle class douche-bag who feels smart and adult about “accepting” that AI needs to be everywhere and we also need to pay for SW every month. Someone person who would say “bUt iT’s fOrD mOdEl T” and has some Alexa non-sense in their house.
my go_to NamingCovention: ANYTHING but camel-case 🤮
I mean U.S. presidential debates don’t need to be posh intellectual philosophy clubs, but cutting Mikes on the stage, that would be a bit too far.
(Also if your data is accurate they would probably run out of uncut Mikes really fast.)
So it’s the window—that is, the open space within the car which has the fuel cap on one side and exhaust pipe on the other—what makes it run.
Edit: Please don’t try to make house run by pouring gas into one of its window.
You don’t know that houses can’t move. Absence of a proof does not imply impossibility.
Sounds ridiculous (esp. for windows / houses) but I think it actually shows where Occam’s Razor comes to the rescue: When deciding what to believe, you should consider how many assumptions either model of the world would have to include in order to explain your observations.
Turns you don’t need to look for indisputable mathematically rigorous proofs, you just need to find the best model.
Sometimes the windows need just a little bit of help.
Well, I was thinking of a quote that was much more similar to what I wrote (and it’s not in the video you linked).
I had such a trouble finding it that I’m starting to feel like it might be one of those “quotes” where the credited author never really said that, but I haven’t completely given up :D
Here’s one closer to what I paraphrased (but not quite it)–quoting an article from cio.com
While Linux pretty much dominates almost every walk of our lives, even on the consumer devices like smartphones and smart TVs, it has not had the same success on the desktop. What does Torvalds think about it? Is Linux a failure on the desktop? Not really. “The desktop hasn’t really taken over the world like Linux has in many other areas, but just looking at my own use, my desktop looks so much better than I ever could have imagined. Despite the fact that I’m known for sometimes not being very polite to some of the desktop UI people, because I want to get my work done. Pretty is not my primary thing. I actually am very happy with the Linux desktop, and I started the project for my own needs, and my needs are very much fulfilled. That’s why, to me, it’s not a failure. I would obviously love for Linux to take over that world too, but it turns out it’s a really hard area to enter. I’m still working on it. It’s been 25 years. I can do this for another 25. I’ll wear them down.”
First of all. This is not another “how do I exit vim?” shitpost.
Oh, I see, so just a clickbait! 👎
Funny how he made it basically for his desktop computer.
33 years later, and Linux is dominating in every part of the OS world except … the desktop.
(I’m paraphrasing his quote – he said something like this years ago, can’t find it, though.)
(Edit: to be more fair with quotes, it might be the case that I “hallucinated” the quote. he might not have said that, or he might have just said part of it and other part would be someone else’s comment. This cio.com article is probably a better source on his position )
Yeah. And I like how even from the message it shows that it’s been already well recognized by then.
If I recall correctly from some RMS’ talks I’ve seen many years ago, they’ve been working on it for years before, it’s just the kernel that was missing. As I see it, GNU and Linux was the breakthrough for FLOSS, since at that time you would still have to use a proprietary kernel. (Well, there’s GNU Hurd, but I’m not sure if it existed at that time, and even if it did, it was not ready.)
That’s a noble goal but does adding more people help the (long-term only, please) effectiveness? At what point does it start hindering it?
I would assume that someone like a pharmacist has to be focused all the time, stakes is high…
Do we have precise data about how physiological state of a pharmacist is changing through the shift? Do we know whether or not the pauses between people – which we might or might not have considered a wasted time – are actually essential for their ability to stay focused and reliable? (Is the answer the same for all of them?) Or maybe they could actually still use part of that time in a productive way, right? Also, why is there lack of people in the first place?
Focusing solely on adding more people to the equation seems to neglect factors like this. This tells me that whoever this factoid is trying to impress is not someone who I would want to trust with managing a pharmacy (or anything except maybe some production line) in the first place.
Is “pharmacists seeing more patients” really a measure of something good? I’m a non-native English speaker so cut me some slack but all I can imagine is just longer queues in the pharmacy and more tired pharmacists (and people who now need to wait in the queue now).
The pic being blurred and all, I thought it’s going to be some dad joke around “pharmacist can see more patients”
I mean, you got a point, but as citizen of Czech Republic, they don’t seem to do enough, and U.S. politics really feels like “right” and “more right”.
You guys need to fix your voting system. (I know it’s easier said than done, my country is about 5th of the age of U.S. Advantage of starting later is a real thing.)
bUt WaSnT sHe iNdIAn yEsTeRdAy?!
I don’t have experience with Twitter or Mastodon but it reminds me of time when I quit drinking.
When I quit drinking and tried to stay around people I used to drink with, I realized really fast how pointless this “engagement” (really just two people speaking past each other, and feeling like they have deep conversation) is. It’s almost insulting what a waste of effort such an “engagement” can be.