You're overcomplicating this. If RMS and his lackeys were so hellbent on ridding prop OS's from the world, they could move marginally closer to that goal by simply deleting w32* ns* and android* from GNU Emacs. That they instead collectively spend several man-months per year stressing about their upkeep means they care more about expanding their userbase than any bullshit notion of "freedom."
Your litany of butthurt actually bolsters my opinion of the bozos at emacs-devel, who I've long criticized for hypocritically advancing emacs on proprietary os's despite their ostensible mission to destroy them.
Sapiens is a bait-and-switch. It starts out great promising at least a
hypothetical account of early man, then begs off saying 30,000 years
is too long ago, and burns 300 pages on essentially wokeism.
Bryson's book is great, but it's wide-ranging pop sci, not specifically
about early man.
I think all chess fans can recall Ivanchuk's recent mortifying defeat at Naroditsky's lightning-quick hands at World Blitz. Just goes to show no matter how devastating the loss, someone, perhaps even your vanquisher, is having an even harder time.
If life could be measured in potential moves considered, he lived
several lifetimes. Sad to see such a force of nature expire so soon.
Condolences to the Russian chick and their kid.
You say a lot of dumb ____ (but to be fair, I said a lot more when I was
your age), but your disdain for transient is on the money. I'm a
satisfied magit user, but transient is a blatant UX error and a
confounded implementation. Some guy spends his 20% time hawking an
entire suite around transient. No one cares.
Dayum, given Transient's prickliness (I always feel like I'm walking on
eggshells when I'm in it) I've never dared to C-s. But I tried this,
and yeah, the transient reverts to a plain text buffer, and you're left
in the lurch.
Yes, a thousand times yes. In stackoverflow, both questioner and
answerer spends a few paragraphs on their life story before getting to
the point. AI will not only happily listen to your life story, it will
almost certainly link some part of its answer to it, thus validating
your existence.
As in chess, stock trading, and combat aviation, people at first
believed humans ought to curate computer-generated strategies. Then it
become obvious the humans were unnecessary.
I'm semi-retired now, but I spent most of my career at a Bell Labs-caliber place (I was the dumbest person there) before "PR" and "code review" became part of the lexicon, and yes, everyone was good enough not to mess things up too badly.
Every company depends on 3-5 guys for their competitive advantage.
While the other thousand guys are interchangeable, they're just as
necessary (and needful) to the company's survival.
You ever have a user who pines for this or that feature, and when you tell him it's already implemented, he'll change the goalposts in some trivial way? It's not solutions we love, it's the warm fuzzy narcissism of complaining.