kalaksi

Each to their own. My experience is the opposite (I use KDE). I have to use Windows at work and it's always such a pain. At least Windows 10/11 finally has multiple workspaces natively and some keyboard shortcuts for managing windows (ironic), but I would have preferred to stay in Windows 10.

Now Windows doesn't even support proper suspend anymore and it won't stay in the "modern standby" either. Constantly waking up and doing god knows what with fans screaming. When I take a look what it's doing, task manager claims that nothing resource intensive is going on. I'm guessing it's hiding some internal processes. It calms down when I put it to sleep again. Sorry for the rant, I better stop before I start.

I'd also consider plastic, and their additives, to be a lot bigger and longer lasting unknown than GMOs.

Not sure if users even realize what the dark patterns are and do. Users aren't all-knowing, with endless time, carefully balancing their attention to try to provide markets with the optimal signal to wisely guide the misbehaving actors.

I agree with this, but can't see how this applies to variable naming. Variable names can be too long, sure, but in my opinion, very short non-obvious variable names also make scanning and reading harder since they are not familiar shapes like more complete words. Additionally, when trying to understand more deeply, you have to stop and read code more often if variable's meaning is not clear.

That said, 1-2 char variable names work well in short scopes, like in some lambda, or when using 'i' for an index in a loop (nested loops would depend on situation), but those are an exception.

Like always, this is probably subjective too. And well-organized codebase probably helps to keep functions shorter, but there's often not much I can do about the existing codebase having overgrown functions all over.

I prefer focusing mostly on 1 task at a time (sometimes 2 for a short time, or asking other agent some questions simultaneously) and doing the task in chunks so it doesn't take much time until you have something to review. Then I review it, maybe ask for some refactoring and let it continue to the next step (maybe let it continue a bit before finishing review if feeling confident about the code). It's easier to review smaller self-contained chunks and easier to refer to code and tell AI what needs changing because of fewer amount of relevant lines.

"This shouldn't be possible. I'm not saying that you cheated, but not not saying that."

0.0011. The quote seems a bit hyperbolic. There were maybe 2-3 that I didn't see and missed. 1-2 that I didn't hit perfectly but close enough. Display probably affects results (but didn't change any settings for this). I have a Dell IPS. I also moved my head around a bit, felt natural while trying to discern the colors.

I do have a good vision (including color). Reminds me of the other color-game where you order some colored boxes to form a spectrum.

Edit: just tried hard mode and got 0.0084. Missed maybe 3 that I couldn't see. Usually some magenta or blue colored. Grey and red / brown seem to be the easiest.

And since the customer was supposedly being careless, they won't get anything from the bank.

Tips like "don't try to write smart code" are often repeated but useless (not to mention that "smart" here means over-engineered or overly complex, not smart).

One setup I had was a vertical (hydroponic) window farm, which looked pretty great, but the roots start to get into the tubing, which I suspect could happen in the rack-mount system too. It also wasn't simple to just take out one plant for maintenance.

A small NFT (nutrient film technique) box has worked very well, requires very little material as substrate and is easy to maintain. Might get problematic if growing the same plants for over a year since the roots can grow a lot and basically partially outgrow the system so the flow of water starts being insufficient and therefore might need at least some trimming and replanting if some of the roots start to suffer.

I'm in the process of trying out deep water culture, which requires even less materials since there's no growing medium, just water, and roots are submerged so doesn't have the same issues as NFT. Probably has it's own problems, though, and air pumps can be loud!

Anyhow, most of my plants are in a passive hydroponics system. "Kratky method" is something a bit similar. I basically replaced soil in pots with clay pellets and manage watering so that I have to water every 2-3 days. Requires clay pellets as the substrate so needs a bit more effort up front, but doesn't require electricity and is more portable when using small/medium sized pots. Pellets can be reused (at least most of them). I also added a short tube for monitoring water level and possible maintenance if I need to wash / flush the pot with the plant in it.

Regarding fertilizing, I rarely do any accurate measurements anymore. I got a few pump bottles and measured how much fertilizer one push gets me and wrote on the bottles how many pushes per litre. I also eye-ball the water color a bit since I know how it should look like.

Oh, and the plants that have done well for me, and can grow for a long time with multiple harvests (so no lettuce): peppers, cherry tomatoes, cucumbers, trying some small strawberries

About voting with your wallet, I agree that it'd be best if companies actually had to pay for those externalities you mentioned. If you have spare money to spend, you can view not choosing the cheapest option as supporting or donating. That's what I sometimes do when e.g. buying locally instead of ordering from somewhere far for cheaper. I can get local faster and it's more convenient, so there's lazyness, but thinking about it as supporting helps me rationalize it further (and it is true). I don't think it really hurts me more than buying something else that I don't strictly need. I see indirect value in trying to uphold things I like.