I agree it’s not a blockchain, (although it has chain properties) but it is kinda decentralized. By convention projects almost exclusively have a single remote, and by convention that single remote is treated as an ultimate source-of-truth… But you can absolutely have the same repo with multiple remotes defined, and one could establish different schemes to determine which branches on which remotes represent what in terms of “truth”.

Here, take this cigarette!

You don’t want a department that you throw it over the fence to, you want them embedded on your team. Keep those feedback loops TIGHT bois

Ok, I think I see your position more clearly now:

You’re thinking about people who are interested and installing based on technical interest and curiosity.

In those cases, I think you’re probably right. There is probably some base competency at play. A desire to learn. Probably someone in their sphere to support.

I’m thinking more about the type of people who would buy a Chromebook. Or my cheap ass parents who want to squeeze another 5 years out of an ailing laptop. They don’t want to spend any money and just want to use Facebook and YouTube. Send some emails. Connect to wifi. Print their boarding passes. Not have their machines riddled with viruses within minutes because their windows OS isn’t getting security updates anymore. I think this is actually a massive use case, and I want Linux to be accessible to them without needing to use the terminal for anything.

I can’t even begin to count the number of times I’ve seen absolutely terrible advice posted and taken regarding how to do things in Linux. Can’t connect to something? Easy, make a blanket iptables rule to permit everything. Something can’t read a file? Chmod 777. Install isn’t working? Just install as root and use root as your general login from there on out.

It’s hard to learn Linux.

But it’s even harder to FORGET what you’ve learned, to empathize with what it was like to not understand it at all. That’s why it’s SO HARD for us who’ve been using it daily for a decade to empathize with newcomers.

It’s why people literally can’t fathom why people are afraid of the terminal.

It’s why, even when someone takes the time to explain why, people go, “nah, that couldn’t possibly be it”

It’s like when gun people can’t comprehend why people are afraid of guns. The answer is obvious they just can’t hear it.

Edit: I think I better understand that there are more nuances around the cases now, and I think I’m being unfair by making blanket statements about what is and isn’t obvious

Right, and so if you have no idea what ANY of it means you just bail back to windows.

IMO, caution, wariness, concern, and unfamiliarity manifest as revulsion.

EVs. Solar panels. Heat pumps. Anything outside of CIS heteronormal relationships.

I’m my experience, after the age of like, 25, people (in GENERAL… Obviously many expectations) feel like they’ve got life figured out and push back against pretty much anything that challenges whatever they’ve grown accustomed to.

Nobody bitched about the DOS prompt when nobody knew how to use computers. Young people learned it. Old people insisted computers were a fad and pushed back entirely.

In my calculation, it’s just typical and predictable human response. Open to other theories though.

I mean, the answer to this is obvious if you can empathize.

Gui has baked into it hints on cause and effect. The terminal is a freeform incantation machine where you need to know and utter magic spells.

sudo rm -rf /

Is just as magically nonsense as

sudo apt-get update

If you don’t know what ANY of it does, your capacity to fuck things up is unbounded on the terminal. In a GUI, rightly or wrongly, you expect your capacity to fuck things up is bounded by the context at hand. I do not expect that I can nuke my system clicking through Firefox.

You can claw the terminal from my cold dead hands, but I’m not offended by the notion of a GUI.

Why? Because developer attention scales broadly by usage. Well used projects get more love. If we could even break 10% home adoption of any Linux distro and the runaway effect of net new developer input would destroy closed source operating systems, and I’m here for it. If that means adding a fucking Ubuntu checkbox to let people enable Wayland without strictly requiring the command line go fucking nuts.

'Nailing down the definition of a story point to “1 developer day” oughta do it ’

This is an interpretation of what happened. It’s the one that paints America in the most favourable light, for sure.

Another one is that the “no surrender” mentality was a direct result of the terms of the Potsdam Declaration which demanded “unconditional surrender” from Japan. Japan knew they had lost, they were just hoping to fight for the SPECIFIC surrender condition of the preservation of the Imperial line (aka, let the Emporer still be the Emporer, preserve the family).

Had the Potsdam Declaration permitted that concession, it very well may have been the case that no nukes would have been necessary.

Anyways: tough to understand the exact truth of any hypothetical situation. I just think it’s unfortunate that the “The USA HAD to, though” argument is so often repeated without a very full context of the surrounding political realities. It’s a very bite sized explanation, and it paints the USA in a fantastic light. It’s perhaps not a coincidence that it was AT Potsdam that the west hinted to Stalin of the existence of the nuclear bomb.

What’s the point of building the thing if you can’t prove to the world you have it, and are willing to use it?

I’m in love with these foghorn leghorn memes and I hope they never stop

My critique is of your process, not your result. And, my thesis is that in the long term, developing and refining your how is actually more important than coming to a correct conclusion.

If you just are told what a correct conclusion is and you don’t understand why, and can’t even evaluate the validity of why, then you’re you’re just surrendering yourself to group think. This is how people get MAGA-ized or Jordan Peterson-ized and how they can’t get out.

Hypothetically, let’s say someone was staunchly pro-Israel, and NOTHING they were doing made you want to be critical of actions by them.

And then say that suddenly they changed their mind. Not because of the genocide they’re perpetrating against the Palestinians, but instead because MTG was going off about “Jewish space lasers”. Ok, sure, maybe it’s “good” that interests have coincidentally aligned, but you’re still not really a rational agent, and I can’t really trust you to make ethical evaluations because your process is nonsensical.

It’s more important to me, and for your role as a member of a functional society to be able to critically evaluate information than it is for you to simply “land” on a good conclusion by what is essentially random chance.

I do recognize it’s difficult to admit that you’ve changed your mind. I am sorry, I do commend you for it. I even respect you for it.

Consider this just a call to action that I sincerely believe that you can improve your ability to self-assess and evaluate information critically and logically. Without someone explaining the weakness in your decision making process, you’d be missing an opportunity to consider and reevaluate your own processes.

So you were able to gloss over all of the actual scummy things she does for personal benefit…

And the one thing that changed your mind is something that had NOTHING to do with her?

It wasn’t her procedure. It wasn’t her spa. She has nothing to do with this.

This is like if I say “cycling is great, you should do it” (I like this facial), and then instead of buying a bike from a bike shop (licensed spa), you buy it from a shady bike thief (unlicensed spa with no records leaving unsealed blood laying around). And then it turns out the bike was stolen from a drug lords kid (HIV positive blood from unknown source). So when they see you riding it they shoot you (gets HIV).

There are many, many people at fault in a scenario like this. But, unbelievably, in THIS scenario Gwyneth actually isn’t one of them.

It won’t be too long before it’s this AND the mess they make every time they eat.

Prioritize an easy to clean high chair don’t make my mistake.

Removed by mod

I wish the article explained why people were against getting married? Like, kids, as a father, I get it.

But for marriage, is it just seen as an unnecessary formality? Is it about an aversion to long term relationships? Is there a cultural perception that you must have kids if you get married and people want to avoid a married-no-children stigma?

I agree that the author didn’t do a great job explaining, but they are right about a few things.

Primarily, LLMs are not truth machines. That just flatly and plainly not what they are. No researcher, not even OpenAI makes such a claim.

The problem is the public perception that they are. Or that they almost are. Because a lot of time, they’re right. They might even be right more frequently than some people’s dumber friends. And even when they’re wrong, they sound right. Even when it’s wrong, it still sounds smarter than most peoples smartest friends.

So, I think that the point is that there is a perception gap between what LLMs are, and what people THINK that they are.

As long as the perception is more optimistic than the reality, a bubble of some kind will exist. But just because there is a “reckoning” somewhere in the future doesn’t imply it will crash to nothing. It just means the investment will align more closely to realistic expectations as the clarity of what realistic expectations even are become more clear.

LLMs are going to revolutionize and also destroy many industries. It will absolutely fundamentally change the way we interact with technology. No doubt…but for applications which strictly demand correctness, they are not appropriate tools. And investors don’t really understand that yet.

I will admit to asking that exact question.

What mod helps there?

I keep saying that I’ll finish a vanilla playthrough before getting into mods.

But they keep adding expansive and amazing DLC, so I keep doing more vanilla playthroughs.

I can say that even with official content, it’s still a very expansive war crimes simulator.

Free speech absolutist