Not to discredit #religion on it’s good sides, though.
All that abstraction away of the nit & grit of material life, does allow the sages and saints to arrive at the general makeup of the #experience of being human much more quickly, efficiently and cleanly.
For to crawl through all that dirt and still have your eye on the prize, is much more tenuous and stressful, without reward or praise, or any of that.
Religion grants you companionship. Materialism grants you a place in the universe.
That moment when you realize your new #4k TV allows you to see the fibers of a Hoodie that football staff are wearing on the sidelines...you can't help but wonder: "what other beautiful little details have I been missing out on?!"
Thank you for your replies about our concerns with UX.
To explain the context, we worked a lot on the UI/UX due to several feedback. We didn't push all that work on our git but that was somewhat a fail.
We asked the help of UX designers and we wanted to open a collective dedicated to that work.
But, we were deeply surprised to see so much messages telling that the UX was OK. We were not used to it.
@aardrian Accessibility would be in the 21th century is AI autofill alternate texts for images. That would be a handy 👌 #user#experience though. No unnecessary/empty🫙human input triggered but precise AI algorithm that just works. Typical AI task would it be?
I never understood the request for "empirical studies" to prove this or that in software development, e.g.:
"Show me an unbiased experiment with measurable outcomes that proves that TDD makes a dev team more productive. Until then, I'll continue doing what I do now."
Let's flip that around:
"Show me an unbiased experiment with measurable outcomes that proves doing [whatever your current process is] makes a dev team more productive than doing TDD."
Unless you can do those experiments (which are extremely difficult to do), you can't use the claim that since there is no "TDD works better" study, that means that it must be worse than what you're currently doing. That's what philosophers call an "appeal to ignorance".
TDD might be worse; you might have a great process! (In which case, I'd love to try it out!) On the other hand, TDD might be better, and you're missing out on improving. Without the (possibly impossible) empirical evidence, you have to try it and see.
It is interesting to observe #recruiters responses as someone who has a #career that is half Game Development and half #Enterprise Software Engineering. When I apply for Enterprise jobs I'm told either "You don't have enough #experience." 🙄 or "You'll just go back to #Gamedev when something is available." (Fair point, it was my original career). When I apply for Gamedev jobs I get "You'll have more luck with Enterprise Java." or "You'll just leave the industry again."
"New developers tend to make more mistakes and have lower performance, whereas developers with 16+ years of experience take full benefit of trunk-based development and perform better overall."
« Le #web dominant (comprenez le web marchand) est devenu un véritable enfer pour ses utilisateurs-ices. Des pisteurs par milliers, des bannières qui vous harcèlent pour arracher votre consentement à vous faire pister, de la publicité agressive partout. »
The imaginative mind.
External sensory input. Processed subjectively by one's particular mood, emotion and humor.
creates internal narratives that can transport the individual to places both dreamt of and unexpected....
Hrm... just some few years ago, a friend and neighbour of mine asked me, for what i use my (way back then arbitrary) Tablet.
Well, i actually used that particular tablet (Samsung Galaxy Tab 4 10.1 with bluetooth keyboard cover - and some weirdo apple bt magic mouse) for a short while (about half a year) as an actual desktop replacement.... Because i was lacking on any hardware otherwise.
But, to be honest, after i had at least some laptop back up and running, that thing was gone instantly.
Still, there were uses for the tablet right outside the uses of a frickin desktop or laptop computer...... Like:
Checking emails..
Checking in to social media stuff (g+, fuckbook, early-fediverse, you name it)
Checking news.
Watching some videos.
Play some game.
Reading (digital/digitalized) books.
And what? ;)
What are your actual uses for a tablet class device novadays?
I still would use it to read some ebooks in case i'm residing in a clinic or something like that...
Let's get this out of the way: they give a number of #reasons why #webservers "might wish" to establish that a web #client is running on a "#trusted" software stack, including things like "make sure other game players aren't cheating" and "ensure I'm talking to another human".
When I was a philosophy grad student longtermism hadn't been invented yet. Even now it is, long after I left the field, apparently a fringe area of research. But what I am now reading about it is frankly alarming.
This is an article from a recovered longtermist philosopher. I'll add some quotes and comments below.
@johnwehrle It's on my radar, though that radar is rather crowded ....
As for fringe / cultish things: there is a long history of such schemes existing Largely To Separate Rich Idiots From Their Money, and it turns out that you can also find a through line through much cultish-thinking generally that it's a #MakeMOneyFast scheme.
That's the fundamental problem of forecasting, prediction, and/or prophecy: it's inherently non-empirical. At best you can point to a track record of past successes, though that has some obvious issues:
Sufficiently vague / subjective predictions that judging is a crapshoot. A/K/A the Nostradamus and/or Cold Reading problems. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cold_reading (I suspect that much the success of current LLM Generative AI models has foundations here.)
The Stock Picker's Scam: Find 1,024 marks, send each a stock pick prediction, half saying it goes up, half down. Whichever proves correct, repeat the mailing to the remaining 512, then 256, then 128, then 64. Finally offer your next set of predictions for some fee to the final 32. Each of those 32 has just seen a record of five perfect predictions. What they don't see are the 992 others who received incorrect predictions. So a full prediction history is required.
Beyond that, as noted above, similarities, mechanisms, mathematical foundations (e.g., thermodynamics), etc., are the best guides we have.