hackit2

It applies to life in general not just to the internet.

Well, when you're explicitly bundling your own terms and conditions you're no longer gift giving you're in-fact entering into a explicit transactional exchange abet you also need to factor in copyright laws of said material. Which also depends on the Sovereign country copyright laws, and also your ability to enforce your copyright or ownership.

I agree with your proposition that it is not considered gift-giving. How-ever that also doesn't excuse the author from explicitly stating it in the terms in the code of the said works that they publish online, how-ever most common-wealth countries do have inherent statutory copyright laws rights that protect the creator of said works.

I think if you look at my gift analogy it maps perfectly to your analogy. I wouldn't be surprised if I gifted code then someone contacted me and wanted to sue me or charge me for using it. That is the nature of a gift, you have no control over other people, if you have a problem with that don't give a gift, it's as simple as that.

When you give a gift, you give a gift unconditionally, it is no longer a gift when there is a underlying expectation on the receiver. It is also a issue about perspective, just because you may consider something to be a "gift" it could be perceived as something else. For example, it could be considered as a form of manipulation by a third party, or a unwanted expectation to owe another person. It can be corrupting.

When is a gift not a gift?

If your not willing to have the other person shame you for your gift then you shouldn't be giving gifts. Gifts are given because you enjoy the act of giving not how the gift is perceived by another person, if that rubs you the wrong way you shouldn't be giving, it's as simple as that.

Asking anonymous strangers on the internet that don't have your best interest in mind how to handle your medical problems is a great recipe for success.

I agree with you how-ever the elephant in the room is a image or topology doesn't predicate anything (A predicate is seen as a property that a subject has or is characterized by). That is the main delineation between them, and why SPO (subject predicate object) is used universality by all modern languages - abet some have different svo ordering but I digress.

The next major draw-back with visual programming is they don't explicitly convey time. You have to infer it via lines or sequence of diagram blocks. Were in a programming language you have sequential order of execution eg. left to right, top to down of of the program flow and stage change. If you attempt to achieve the same with a stateless event driven bus or message queue, you end up having to embed the sequential control flow into the event payload itself.

Mapping to a plane doesn't help you understand how state changes occur over time, or what is the over-all state of the state-machine is.

The only time I've seen visual programming work is when the state is immutable. How-ever it requires a major paradigm shift how one design, develop and test their programs.

A entity can exist over more than one row in your database, but it is useful to uniquely identify each row as the lowest common denominator.

I think your understanding of what the objective of an Academic debate is wrong. What you're referring too isn't a debate it is the Socratic method. The purpose of the Socratic method is to reach a (mutual) understanding and intellectual discovery. The purpose a debate is to persuade and win the argument. They differ significantly in their objectives, methodologies, and atmospheres.

You must of never gone to University because in modern academic debating you have no intentions of conceding your position, you only do when it strengthen your argument, not when it weakens it. I think it is kind of antithetical to debating but it isn't about the truth it is about convincing the audience that your a more credible by presenting a more compelling argument to support your position.

I agree how-ever you cannot be a individual within a collective how-ever a individualistic society allows people to voluntarily choose to balkanize along ethnic or cultural tribes. Which is your inherit statutory right as a individual.

I take the different stance the push to individualism has postponed apathy of Western society as a whole. Look at societies that are still highly nationalistic or collectivism they're either in-decline or being exploited by the West.

The power of individualism is it allows society to exploit individuals who're at the end of the population bell curve.

ChatGPT like all transformers (language models) depends on how well you prime the model as it can only predict the next series of tokens over a finite probability space (the dimensions it was trained on) , it is up to you as the prompt creator to prime that model so it can be used as a foundation for further reasoning.

Normally people who get bad results from it would also get similar results if they asked a domain expert. Similarly different knowledge domains use a different corpus of text for their core axioms/premises, so if you don't know the domain area or those keywords your not going to be able to prime the model to get anything meaningful from it.

I hope your statement is hyperbolic because we're all doomed if you expect a person to know how to operate a nuclear power plant. Normally, your testing if they can follow operational procedure that were created by people who designed the power plant in the first place.

Similar it is unreasonable and bordering on negligence to assume a person has the skill set unique to your situation.

By articulating the internal discomfort the problem goes away because it mostly never about what you think the problem is because the problem is just a placeholder.

Apologies for the long sentence.

The first step is articulating your problems, after that you don't need anyone to help resolve it. The tools you use to solve them are all the same assertiveness, accountability, and your own boundaries but if you skip over articulation those tools are worthless because your just randomly walking around in the dark trying to find a solution to a problem that you think is the problem, which feeds into a vicious feedback loop of learnt helplessness.

That is why a therapist will get you to articulate what you mean when you say a word/phrase because people have different meaning of words and/or phrases. That is why when clients relapse, they can go to a different therapist who uses the same vocabulary/words/phrases.

At the end of the day, there is a bit of a serenity to it all. You stop trying to manipulate the world, and start finding people who have the same wants, needs, desires as you. but, alas the first step is all-ways articulation.

Most people who're suffering from cognitive dissonance don't have a problem with the dissonance, how-ever they struggle with articulating themselves with their limited vocabulary, it is only after they obtain the vocabulary can they cognitively start process their emotions/experiences. Its only when the frontal cortex can build new adaptive mental models to process the emotions can people move forward, Everything else is a coping strategy.

It is a large part why therapy is useful because you out-source that vocabulary/articulation/interpretation to a third party who can articulate it back to you which helps speed up that feed-back loop/process.