haleudo

It is.

FOSS is for free. Non-FOSS is $infinity. It's a very simple price plan.

> What mostly riles me up about some 'foss movement' people is the fact that some of them think they're morally superior.

That may be so. I also don't like that. But the way to address that is not to be full of yourself yourself.

> In general I prefer if people keep their politics out of IT infrastructure.

Fine, then go somewhere else and don't use Codeberg. Your criticism is part of bringing politics into this. It's about freedom and choice. You have the choice to go somewhere else, nobody is forcing you.

> It's only a great alternative if you believe GitHub deserves to die

Geez, why so extreme? They choose whom they support for free, and they choose FLOSS projects with similar goals/philosophies. If your project has a different philosophy, fine, up to you, but it's not something they want to spend their time to support for free. You are welcome to go somewhere else, including going to or staying at GitHub.

Nobody wants anything "to die". It's about providing alternatives for people who are not entirely happy. If you are, fine, nobody forces you to anything. Just like you can't force the Codeberg people to provide something to you for free which they are not comfortable with.

A: This thing! It's true!

B: Prove it!

A: No, you prove first! With really rigorous thinking, please!

All good advice. I especially agree with the first line as a solid foundation. As long as you don't sleep well, forget the rest. And as long as you don't exercise regularly, the regular sleep will be much harder.

One thing I'd add though is: A tidy mind. Clean up your thoughts. If there is something you don't understand or that seems inconsistent, seek understanding instead of just ignoring it. Of course you need some tradeoff, but too many people just live with constant chaos in their heads and BS-tting they way through life. By extension, your surroundings shape your thoughts. A somewhat tidied up apartment, clean kitchen sink and bathroom/toilet, fridge, desk, hard disk, inbox, those things work wonders. Doesn't have to be spotless, but chaos just distracts and creates overhead that can make you miserable.

(Obviously, some chaos sparks creativity, but there is a difference it a big box with assorted "creative" items versus not finding things on your desk because of all the crap on it.)

The network is the prime example for forcing serialization of events.

Tbf, I agree with the recipe criticism. Would be neat with a dependency graph instead of a step-by-step list of things to do when baking a cake. Would have saved me a lot of headache in the past. (The table in your link expresses a tree, which is probably sufficient for most purposes.)

> And when you have colonists with that altruistic mindset, then yes - the idiot rate of that society has the potential to be significantly lower.

If people sign up to this trip believing that they are getting away from all the selfish idiots, then they are in for a big surprise.

Seen what happened at Twitter recently?

How do your scifi stories solve social issues like the breakdown of civilization following events like civil wars caused by events like the Capitol storming?

In other words, isn't the threat to the human species mostly within itself, and finding solutions to those issues much more impactful (and attainable) than dreaming of building such fantasy structures?

Aside from the realization that society wouldn't work differently on Mars either. Look around you. The fraction of idiots in a society on Mars is unlikely to be lower than here on Earth.

I completely agree. That functional style actually favors readability and maintainability is a quite strong claim which I read often but it's usually lacking evidence.

In my experience, software engineers "think" imperatively. First do this, then do that. That's what we do in everyday life (open a random cooking book..) and that's also what the CPU does, modulo some out-of-order and pipelining tricks. A declarative style adds some extra cognitive load upfront. With training you may get oblivious to that, but in the end of the day, the machine does one thing after the other, and the software engineer wants to make it do that. So, either you express that more "directly" in an imperative style, or try to come up with a declarative style which may or may not be more elegant, but that this ends up more readable or maintainable is on the functional proponents to prove.