em-bee

to buy consumer RAM futures i would have to predict the price the RAM can be sold at 5 or 10 years from now. that seems very risky. why would i do that instead of buying AI RAM instead?

that sounds totally wrong. not as in you are wrong, but as in this reality is bad. apparently, according to wikipedia at least in some US states, marriage automatically emancipates a minor, but not in massachusetts.

with the right culture and support there is nothing wrong with getting married early.

the problem comes from arranged marriages, especially if there is a large age difference.

instead of setting a minimum age, which does not help much, it should be easier to refuse, and even if agreed, it should be possible for anyone under say 25 to simply have a marriage annulled or a divorce if there are obvious problems (such as the age difference).

but if both are young, then marrying young has its benefits. the younger we are the more adaptable we are, and that helps to build a relationship and makes it easier to get along.

the idea that we should be fully matured adults before getting married doesn't actually work, because living together is part of the process of maturing, and the older you are the more difficult is it to develop certain skills and attitudes that you need for a successful marriage.

in china, people get married much earlier than in the west, but they also have strong family and social support for doing so.

but i see that differently. people join a group because they get something out of it, sure. but what they get out of it is being part of a community and contributing to a common goal. that some people contribute more and others less does not matter. at least in the groups i was or am in. we joined the linux user group because we believe in the ideals of FOSS. some may help others, but that's not the reason for joining. same goes for religious groups. the goal of those groups, the motivation to participate is not the transaction. it's the belief in the underlying principles. these groups will fall apart if they fail to attract new members, but the ideals, if they matter, will survive.

you argue that the fate of groups is to end when leaders stop putting effort, which is kind of self evident unless there is an underlying premise that is able to outlast the individual groups. my group was effectively dead before i took over. i rebuilt it almost from scratch. that was only possible because it was based on an underlying idea that others could identify with that was not dependent on my person. FOSS groups come and go but the FOSS community as a whole won't ever die. same goes for religion. at least the kind of religion that is based on written word.

why is a 75 year old organization not old enough? given that members can join at most 15 years, that's already 5 generations.

you also argue that the only thing that makes groups last is money or social status. if that were the case most groups would not even start.

i understand your personal experience, and that's fine, but that has nothing to do with multi generational organizations. it seems to me that you are mixing two unrelated things here.

neovim: by default they are saved to the dedicated directory in the application data folder

I think a user could be forgiven for assuming that it was fine to use the same value when trying out a migration from vim to neovim

neovim would also overwrite its own old version of the file. the point is that the expectation that neovim should watch out for files that are used by other applications is in my opinion not reasonable. it won't even watch out for its own old undo files.

users may have the expectation that neovim and vim are compatible, but that expectation is simply not entirely fulfilled. you can't share config files unless you have some minimal ones that just happen to work. so why would you be able to share other files?

the question is, how are these expectations formed, and what is reasonable to expect?

when it started out neovim was very compatible with vim. but from my experience with FOSS and based on the stated goal of neovim at least to me it was clear that compatibility was not going to last. not everyone shares that experience, and thus their expectations are different. neovim should perhaps make that more clear and for one be aware that people expect compatibility and warn users accordingly. an argument could be made that if a user changes the undodir value, there is a higher chance that they may try to use the same for vim. but then vim devs would need to do that too.

but does not considering that make devs not good at what they are doing? i don't think so. for one, if someone thinks the devs are not good enough they should stop using neovim (as some people here in the thread announced they are doing. their choice). personally i think this is average for FOSS and good enough. we can't expect everyone to be perfect. the correct response to an issue besides reporting it is not to complain but to contribute a fix.

my brother was in a group where members had to be less than 27 years of age. in the year of your 27th birthday you became an old sock and left. and despite that this group put out high quality guide books on how to identify plant and animal species which is their main interest. it was founded 75 years ago and is still active. no financial or social standing opportunities to be had.

again, i am sorry for your experience, but this is absolutely not the limit of human society.

i think Free Software and Open Source are counter examples. and i bet there are more. FOSS started with a good idea. not with a good leader. i love and respect richard stallman, but he is not a good leader. people follow him because he has a great idea and makes every effort to defend that idea.

the point being: if you have a set of beliefs, principles and you find others that agree, you potentially have something that is strong enough to keep the group on course.

i don't quite get the meaning of this in the context of accepting agency of others. because it works both ways. either it means you assume that they are interested in you to validate yourself, or it means you need see/experience them actively showing interest in order to validate your approach.

likewise with agency, i can assume someone has agency, which is actually bad because it leads to thinking: if they didn't want this they would have used their agency to stop it. or i can ask myself whether there might be something that could prevent this person from using their agency.

a problem is also that when approaching someone you know what you want, and what you want could be something harmless. but the approached person doesn't know that if they don't know you well enough already.

no, it isn't. if you think it is then you should look for other friends.

you are reading an awful lot into the comment.