nativecoinc

> Flagged for that reason.

The submission, of course. :)

Amazingly the article title itself says “May Be Oldest European Artifacts” but then the body of the article says “among the oldest European-made”!

Flagged for that reason.

> Technically Newfoundland is an island

For anyone who says this I wonder if they are consistent with how they discuss continents:

- They take care to talk about the Caribbean as something in the waters near North America but not in North America itself

- They talk about Indonesia as something that is in the waters close to Asia and Australia—no need for “Oceania” obviously

- Madagascar as an island next to Africa

And so on and so on.

> Of course, I believe the climate crisis is the most important problem in the world. However I don't think former colonial powers have any right to say or rather lecture former colonised countries on their obligations, when the colonial powers haven't properly addressed why the colonised countries are in the state they are in.

Words and lectures are irrelevant. Only what the First World can do—including influencing the Third World—matters.

> It is also not just at the feet of former colonial powers, the US wasn't a coloniser but did have a tremendous imperial influence throughout the Third World that has stymied progress and thrown Third World countries into a debt trap that they cannot escape (unfortunately China is doing the same these days). This needs to be addressed too.

I guess “stymied progress” is a way of phrasing it.

And what about the Philippines?

Not being a hypocrite is not really that important compared to solving the problem at hand.

You also get into absurd situations like how former colonial powers can’t say that up-and-coming colonial powers can’t develop in that particular way. Some things are just bad to do.

Environmental activist wizards get resistance to environmental hazards. Mud won’t bother them.

What-ifs about how the world operates are non sequiturs. They apparently got their way in Germany even though nuclear is greener than petroleum energy (according to the premise of the GP comment).

Yes, an allusion is indeed a kind of meme...

I guess it’s effective because it is similar to Markdown and other lightweight stuff: things like bullet items are just written like bullet items, with hyphens (or similar). You write it how you want it to be displayed. Granted for a diagram it’s more complicated since it’s a graph and not a tree, and you write it with declarative arrows rather than as ASCII art, but perhaps that in practice strikes a nice balance between being non-finicky and at the same being simple enough (syntax-wise) in order to deal with.

That aside the “unreasonable effectiveness” allusion to “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences” is clearly overwrought. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves.

> Reaching for code to solve my code problem seemed like something that would only appeal to someone that loves code so much that they're probably no good at visualizing.

It looks more like a pseudo-markup to me.

You could watch interviews/conversations with them and judge for yourself.

I like Be'lakor – An Ember's Arc

https://genius.com/Belakor-an-embers-arc-lyrics

It’s a song about a photon.

There are some teachers of Samatha meditation, a Buddhist concentration meditation, that teach that you at any point are meditating at one of ten stages. This is both about skill as well as about factors like how agitated your mind is in general. And these stages seem to have very well-defined descriptions: for example one stage might be differentiated from the previous one by overcoming drowsiness. This is very helpful since some people teach meditation by just telling you how to do it but not (in fact sometimes actively avoiding) how you can evaluate where you are and how you are doing. Then the practice becomes just about “being present” and other slogans that might be wholly non-actionable.

It’s also very difficult to protest this kind of approach (edit: the non-goal approach) since merely mentioning things like "goal" or "evaluation" will trigger someone’s knee-jerk you’re-doing-it-wrong reaction, even though what they practice might be completely different to what you are doing or trying to achieve.

There are even a few regular contributors on the Git project who complain about the workflow being `git send-email`/email centered.

I had an interview where I had linked my SO and my GitHub. The latter just because it wasn’t completely empty.

He cheekily complained that I didn’t have much activity.

I don’t know what the Enneagram is.

Some things aren’t just taken out of thin air. Part of being a “social creature” is that you pick up on what other people think of you by observing how they talk about other people that you have something in common with. And that doesn’t have to be something wishy-washy like “being boring”; it could be very concrete, objective things, like being X or having Y. Then you go, huh, that’s me as well. And then you listen to them say that oh, people who are X, Y, and Z are A and B. And that’s you as well.

But no (someone says), they’re wrong: it’s just their opinion. It’s entirely subjective and partial.

... But don’t you see? That’s what being a social creature is—being at the whims of the opinion of others. How can you possibly claim that Humans Are Social Creatures, and then blame the person who is affected by What Others Think of Them?

What helped the most with my depression was meditation. All alone. A difference between hopelessness and a positive disposition (also among people, despite not knowing or interacting with any of them).

> We are a social species. We need others to be happy.

The flipside is that we can make each other miserable as well.

> Yeah, people feel less lonely when they’re around people who they like and who like them.

People who they like and who like them. And you don’t think that that is a massive caveat? The original claim was just “people”, not “fantastic and awesome people”.

> “People feel more lonely when they’re around other people” is the type of stuff you could only find on the internet or in academia, you can logic yourself into it but it’s so far beyond common sense it’s insane

And who are you to make this statement? Only on the Internet and in academia? I don’t know what “only on the Internet” is supposed to mean. That everyone lies on the Internet or that none of them (us) are real people? I’ve seen people who have made this claim. On the Internet at least. (How candid are random people about this “in real life”?) They seemed sincere enough about it.

I don’t even know what the hell you are getting at with “logic yourself into”, as if how people feel is just a philosophical-analytical experiment gone wrong. Get a grip.

This is pretty obvious from my experience. I don’t really get “lonely” but I can be miserable when out among people. But by myself I might just be bored. But only some times.

You know how “humans are social creatures”? A sort of corollary to that is that people define what a normal person is. And very subtle-like too. No one needs to spell it out one-on-one. But it’s always there. A constant reminder of how you might not conform, might not be good enough, might not have the right connections, might have the wrong interests. And once you check enough of those anti-boxes you realize that neither you nor other people have anything to offer each other. You are a bore, and they are there just to remind you of your failures.

That one can be lonely or feel bad in a crowd of people might be counter-intuitive to many because the narrative goes that loneliness is a disease that inflicts the individual and is only about a lack of people. But isn’t that hypocritical? How can you say that “humans are social creatures” and just outright deny all the negative signals that people (us) send to each other all the time?

A fork where you diverge from the original is still a fork.

Most long-lived forks that I hear about are things that have developed into their own projects and have no intention of merging back to the original. Contrast with a short-term fork which will only live a few months and then will be hopefully be merged into the original; it will probably be so short-lived that people outside of the project won’t hear about it as a “fork” with its own distinct name.

A “fork” isn’t only making a GitHub fork so that you can make a PR against the original because you found a typo on the readme.

Maybe "the whole computer is out of memory" (general purpose allocator). Contrast with a custom allocator which might only be able to work with a few kilobytes (for example).

People love to latch onto Structurelessness but it seems that I can’t stop hearing about “leadership in Rust” this, “governance in Rust” that, “working group on the subcommittee” this-and-that for the last few years.[1] So an insider realized that they have less power than they do. So what? This isn’t “structurelessness”; it’s just the formal structures having less power in reality, and also insider infighting.

As if informal politicking doesn’t happen inside ostensibly formal governance.

And Graydon has (according to himself) been out of this game for ten years. Then he was like, “Oh this sounds like this meme that I like” (which he came up with as more of a bystander than an insider, by the way).

[1] See the previous submission [2]. How many levels of leaders of the leadership chat on the leadership working group steering committee is it on when it tries to explain the chain of events.

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36101501

> Fasterthanli.me called out these informal networks and promised to stop participating in them in order to try to minimize their legitimacy

Concretely, he

> Up until recently, I was part of two private online discussion spaces where a bunch of Rust people hung out.

So he’s resigning from two private chats/forums about Rust. Okay.

> And also in some ways unsatisfying, because he seems on a roll on some idea, but then he doesn't know the solution, and the proposal of hiring experts prompts nervous questions.

It’s a typical "compiler nerd" (any nerd) response. You don’t know something so you think you can outsource it to someone who has the required skills.

Which is fine in a limited sense. But if the problem is political then you might get other problems if you outsource it too much.

Were you actually surprised?

I only make passwords based on the lyrics of Neil Peart.

    N3tBoi\N3gGril\SendY0urM3ssage\AroundTh3W0rld

Context:

“Notes from the Git Contributors' Summit 2021, virtual, Oct 19/20”

https://lore.kernel.org/git/nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2110211129130....

Yet another meta-history tool, but this one is a supposed to be rolled into git(1) itself, so that tools like git-commit, git-rebase, and others will work with it.

See also: https://github.com/git-series/git-series/

See also: `git range-diff` used between versions of a branch (regular branches: manual checkouts like `feature-v3`)

See also: probably others

We use Bitbucket at work. If we switched to some other forge next week I would not care.

Git forges should be expendable.

> My mistake, I saw your name was xiaodai and assumed.

Oh my bad, I disregarded your comment based on your assumed Chinese nationality and “spam” (also assumed?). Since you’re not Chinese you’re worth my time.

I don’t get it.

Comparing ten-years-ago Java with todays: Yeah, it’s come a long way but it’s nowhere close to what Scala is (for better or worse; I truly don’t know).

Perl 5 has that.

Perl 5 seems to have all these annoying boilerplate lines that you need to add to every file in order to get “Perl The Good Parts”. But I think (I read) that they managed to boil it down to just one line.