Some kind of general fitness testing?
You know, involving heart, lung capacity, performance?
Some kind of general fitness testing?
You know, involving heart, lung capacity, performance?
All the ones where the idea was to “just start something, grow grow grow, then figure out monetization later” is wild to me.
E.g. reddit. It worked. CEO is rich, site is still online. Somehow they got investors probably, presumably.
I get not having profit. I get not having income, if it’s in some prototype phase. But having no plan or idea whatsoever for how to monetize and still getting VC? Wild.
I had a phase as a teen when I was constantly swearing. My parents told me that, it can’t be that bad and it’s really annoying.
And it’s mostly an impulse reaction and we’re kind of above that.
It doesn’t mean that you can’t express pain or anger. You’re just not insulting people’s ears if you scream “Aaaaah” when you bang your toe against a table leg or something. And your environment really doesn’t deserve it. Most people are somewhat compassionate and you’re just swearing while they try to help… that’s not a pleasant environment for them to be in. It makes it harder to help you.
No to both questions. I just made a change and that was it. And it has never stopped me from expressing anything.
If anything, it lends more weight to the regular words.
A _______ criminal? Or a criminal?
You can still put the same emotion into the words, they’re just not swear words. :)
Having an easy on the eyes markdown that is also easy to parse would be cool.
But YAML does these things:
https://ruudvanasseldonk.com/2023/01/11/the-yaml-document-from-hell
which are not excusable, for any reason.
I’m not sure now that I think about it, but I find this more explicit and somehow more free than json. Which can’t be true, since you can just
{"anything you want":{...}}
But still, this:
<my_custom_tag>
<this>
<that>
<roflmao>
...
is all valid.
You can more closely approximate the logical structure of whatever you’re doing without leaving the internal logic of the… syntax?
<car>
<tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve> </tyre>
<tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve> </tyre>
<tyre> <valve>open</valve> </tyre>
<tyre> air, <valve>closed</valve> </tyre>
</car>
Maybe I just like the idea of a closing tag being very specific about what it is that is being closed (?). I guess I’m really not sure, but it does feel nicer to my brain to have starting and closing tags and distinguishing between what is structure, what is data, what is inside where.
My peeve with json is that… it doesn’t properly distinguish between strings that happen to be a number and “numbers” resulting in:
myinput = {"1":"Hello",1:"Hello"}
tempjson = json.dumps(myinput)
output = json.loads(tempjson)
print(output)
>>>{'1': 'Hello'}
in python.
I actually don’t like the attributes in xml, I think it would be better if it was mandatory that they were also just more tagged elements inside the others, and that the “validity” of a piece of xml being a certain object would depend entirely on parsing correctly or not.
I particularly hate the idea of attributes in svg, and even more particularly the way they defined paths.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/SVG/Tutorial/Paths#curve_commands
It works, but I consider that truly ugly. And also I don’t understand because it would have been trivial to do something like this:
<path><element>data</element><element>data</element></path>
YAML
To each their own indeed.
;)
It is very cool, specifically as a human readable mark down / data format.
The fact that you can make anything a tag and it’s going to be valid and you can nest stuff, is amazing.
But with a niche use case.
Clearly the tags waste space if you’re actually saving them all the time.
Good format to compress though…
It also means “we don’t know (yet)” so there is a chance it’s not that toxic.
At the cost of sounding naive and stupid
It may be a naive question, but it’s a very important naive question. Naive doesn’t mean bad.
The answer is that that is not possible, because the compiler is supposed to translate the very specific language of C into mostly very specific machine instructions. The programmers who wrote the code, did so because they usually expect a very specific behavior. So, that would be broken.
But also, the “unsafety” is in the behavior of the system and built into the language and the compiler.
It’s a bit of a flawed comparison, but you can’t build a house on a foundation of wooden poles, because of the advantages that wood offers, and then complain that they are flammable. You can build it in steel, but you have to replace all of the poles. Just the poles on the left side won’t do.
And you can’t automatically detect the unsafe parts and just patch those either. If we could, we could just fix them directly or we could automatically transpile them. Darpa is trying that at the moment.
“We didn’t consider the idea because it sounded silly”
Isn’t something I want scientists to say. So good on them for taking a look at the feasibility.
No.
https://www.sovereigntechfund.de/programs/applications#requirements
Take a look.
Though, if you have not heard of the program before, you’re probably not involved with a project that qualifies.
How is it vague?
It’s vague in all the legal ways:
First of all which kinds of games it applies to. It obviously can’t work for games that have a technical server requirement, … world of warcraft, but actually EVE online. The guys who run that game, get experimental hardware that’s usually military only (or at least they did in the past). The server is not something, you could run even if you wanted to. Drawing the legal boundary between what “could be” single player offline (e.g. the crew, far cry, hitman), wasn’t done.
It’s not clear how it should apply to in terms of company scale. The new messenger legislation that was passed, made space for the EU parliament / system to declare and name, individually, who counts as a company that is is big enough, so that they have to open their messenger system to others for interoperability. It’s not clear if the law has to apply to everyone, and every game, or just e.g. companies above 20 million revenue or something.
It’s not clear what happens if a company goes bankrupt, and the system isn’t immediately ready to keep working.
And a few more.
That being said, I think Thor’s stance on this is silly. All of that is part of the discussion that is now starting. He could raise good points and get them included, but I guess that’s not happening.
then it was a weak and shitty dream. Get a new one.
do it anyway. Who cares. You know what’s the worst that could happen? You try, and it doesn’t work out and then you can look back at it and consider it “gave it a good shot, didn’t work out”. And then you can point to all the people who still sit on their couch and didn’t even try.
Glockness Monster *teleports behind you*
“nothing personal, kid”
“The computer” decides when to install updates and which ones to install.
No.
You know how boxers don’t beat up their trainers?
This is like that.
The meritocratic, capitalist way, would be to to put a property tax on it and to increase that tax, until
Let’s go people!
The show runner insisted on telling “their version of the story”.
Which… let’s put it like this:
If you’re making a TV series about a book series written by a world famous author, and you think you can do a variation / “your take” on the story, because you think you’re just that great of a writer, artist, director, etc., then you better actually be on his level.
1984 literally has a manifesto describing what’s happening.
In fact, the brainwashing of the kids in 1984 to report on their parents having / reading / discussing “controversial media” is a major element of the dystopia. Those media are not explicitly named, but I don’t think they have to be.
It’s not that they are unfriendly.
But they are 100% there to represent the company’s interest and not yours. If there is any way, to… turn a situation into something where the company gets more money out of it and you get less, it’s their job to make that happen.
In theory they should have employee retention in mind. In practice, nobody does their HR that way anymore.
All my interactions with HR have been “professional polite” and appropriately friendly. There is no reason to be unnecessarily mean, they are also just doing their job.