disintegore

This is a slam dunk for free software. Even Oracle can't deny the benefits.

More precisely, it's not the standardized testing that's hurting, it's the underlying material conditions.

I expected Google Ultron

Why not just make Windows 10 better and have that be the last OS

Proton is amazing. I have no other words, it's just amazing.

Honestly at this point I am curious to see how far Microsoft can degrade the experience before its users discover the concept of self-agency.

Interesting. Would the differences in binary sizes be prohibitive for use on the internet?

For 99% of us that's just an implementation detail anyway. Although I remember reading that Firefox can compile wasm faster than normal network transfer rates so maybe AOT makes more sense there.

I didn't expect my descriptions to be included verbatim hahaha

I thought Planetary Annihilation was a spiritual successor to both TA and SC

I have two suggestions :

TerraTech (https://store.steampowered.com/app/285920/TerraTech/) for the vehicle building category. Very streamlined and surprisingly deep, although the campaign gameplay can be frustrating.

Workers & Resources: Soviet Republic (https://store.steampowered.com/app/784150/Workers__Resources...). A planned economy city builder. It's apparently an extremely deep game with a steep learning curve. Seems to have developed a cult following.

Fantastic post. Your logic is a perfectly hermetic circle.

I'm sure the OP can competently explain all of these things. What they can't do is justify them, or reconcile them with the principles that their society has instilled in them.

I have one major objection.

It's easy to forget, due to the vast wealth of genuinely great volunteer-driven projects out there, that an overwhelming share of open source contributions are actually funded by capital. It's hard to imagine the Linux kernel, or llvm, or even projects like React ever fizzling out due to maintainer burnout or disinterest.

This is fascinating, in my opinion, because our systems of accounting and economical analysis are by design terrible at keeping track of externalities. They are not good at analyzing the potentially holistic value of mutualist projects. Largely speaking whatever cannot fit on a balance sheet becomes the province of philosophy and culture.

Despite all that, in the modern culture of tech companies, the value of FLOSS seems to be understood and the companies that recognize it genuinely seem to out-compete those that don't. They recognize the value it creates for them, even if it's very difficult to estimate the costs that are avoided by using a FLOSS system that would otherwise need to be licensed or built. Even if the completely optional act of using one's own resources to contribute to open source software does not easily map to an equivalent or greater return in accounts receivable or company valuation.

What I mean by this is that the sustainability of "open source" broadly speaking is already demonstrated and I don't see that changing any time soon. What's not demonstrated however is the sustainability of OP's project. I think this is a challenge that they and their users should tackle without implicating the entirety of open source software as a culture, or attempting to impose any responsibilities upon users of open source software that don't already exist.

I've noticed that a lot of industry practices demonstrate their value in unexpected ways. Code tests, for instance, train you to think of every piece of code you write as having at minimum two integrations, and that makes developers who write unit tests better at separating concerns. Even if they were to stop writing tests altogether, they would still go on to write better code.

Microservices are a bit like that. They make it extremely difficult to insert cross cutting concerns into a code base. Conditioning yourself to think of how to work within these boundaries means you are going to write monolithic applications that are far easier to understand and maintain.

That's probably the best heuristic for finding quality stories nowadays. The publishers and their readership are stuck in a taste-affirming feedback loop and it seems most of the big literary awards are administered by people who have chosen representation activism as their primary reason for existing.

Over the years I've seen so many variations of this. "u mad", "triggered", "seethe", "rent free", etc.

I don't know why the internet insists on deriding anyone that reacts strongly to anything. It's something you ought to grow out of after middle school.

More or less. It has precisely zero selling points other than "this software vendor I rely on doesn't support anything else".

Cheap bad faith answer

> They did get the credit, just not for the code, and rightly so.

They received credit for reporting the issue, which is a fraction of what they did. They provided the entire solution, full stop. The maintainer only restated it.

That's a 40mb runtime that's probably already on your system

Pragmatic genius

I resent how much we've trained developers to value concision over everything else. I can't tell you how many times I've seen people use DRY as a justification to alias stuff that's already heavily abstracted by the framework that they use, ending up with less useful interfaces. Either that, or they'll explode the cognitive load by building crazy type hierarchies and inserting opaque anti-patterns like factories and decorators and whatnot.

These are "the wrong abstractions" in the sense that they're not actually crappy code full of conditionals and are actually well-redacted and not all that hard to decipher. They're "the wrong abstractions" in the sense that there's either a way to do it that is simpler and makes fewer assumptions, or in the sense that they are worse than "no abstraction" which is to say sticking to the abstractions that have already been invented for you by people whose jobs it is to do that exact work for millions of engineers and are therefore probably way better equipped.

Scrum gives me the same impression as liberal economics. An intellectual tradition centered around quantifying things that can't reliably be quantified, as well as projecting incomplete models on top of reality in service of economic interests and insisting that they are correct.

Oh, the memories. There was a guy in my RuneScape clan who was known for doing exactly that. Walked me through setting up a vHost and bouncer on a shell account at one time so that I could be 1337 like him, or get us logins for obscure adult sites and say "use a SOCKS proxy, the other ones aren't any good".

He was like the cool older brother we never had. Hope he's alright now. Probably a major factor behind me choosing this career.

That third point is so odd and shoehorned in. If you're talking about AGI and immortality, why not dream a little bigger? How about achieving actual democracy anywhere in the world? Not just in state elections, but economic democracy broadly speaking. Right now we are just going on pretending, and this western chauvinism of yours is a little embarrassing.

To my knowledge, computers can be designed without any transistors

Sadly this is still a market segment in which a proprietary stack dominates. From the perspective of AMD, they could be looking at a situation in which they can either throw billions of dollars at a monopoly protected by intellectual property law, and probably fail, or take a Pareto principle approach and cover their usual niche.

Looking at the pricing, if you only spin those instances up when you need them, you can go a while before you break even. Otherwise it only takes a few months depending on the GPU.

I would imagine that someone really serious about training (or any other CUDA workload) uses both.

Probably the least belligerent superpower in history, internally and externally.

They're no saints. Anybody can see that. But by my estimation 90% of the discourse around China in the west is just pure consent manufacturing.

It was always a farce to begin with. Inventing scarcity where there is none because there was zero willingness to organize production around anything other than markets. It was a bad but understandably necessary move back when the printing press was invented. Centuries later, with practically instant and practically infinite reproduction of most types of information, it's pure insanity.