Youtube comments of p11 (@porky1118).
-
853
-
463
-
287
-
181
-
134
-
122
-
4:12 Also in Bitcoin, there's a steady incentive to keep mining it. Because of the small block size, there will likely be a lot of competition to get a block, which causes the fees to go up.
If fees are too expensive, less people will use Bitcoin, so the fees won't be so expensive anymore. This will lead to less miners and reduced network security. Since the highest network security is an important selling point of Bitcoin, this might lead to a decrease in price, so the users are willing to pay more fees again, so the price doesn't go down any further.
I don't think, there is a downward spiral bitcoin could go down. But if there is because of that, it would most likely benefit Monero.
97
-
65
-
"Welche Funktion hat die Erzählung, Bill Gates..."
Weil Bill Gates sich eindeutig zu viel in die Politik einmischt, dafür dass er weder gewählt ist, noch ein Experte ist.
Ob er böse Absichten hat, sei mal dahingestellt, jedenfalls kann man deshalb zurecht skeptisch sein.
Wir suchen ja Lösungen, und die Lösung kann nicht sein, dass man die Risiken, die von den Verschwörungstheorien aufgegriffen werden, völlig ignoriert werden.
Klar werden da oft Dinge interpretiert, die vermutlich nicht stimmen, deswegen heißen sie ja auch theorien, aber es sind oft ernstzunehmende Risiken damit verbunden.
Kann man auch mal Beispiele nennen, dass es seit langem sogenannte Verschwörungstheoretiker vor einer neuen Weltordnung warnen. Jetzt bei der Corona-Krise fordern wieder einzelne Personen eine Weltregierung.
Ach egal, wen interessierts...
56
-
50
-
47
-
41
-
41
-
39
-
38
-
38
-
36
-
36
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
29
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
14:35 I also thought about that for a bit.
Even if you break up with someone, they will eventually find someone else.
And in order to find someone else, and then also stay in that relationship for some time, they probably have to improve.
It's like multiple persons find partners, which are just fine, but have some problems. Then they are exchanged, and now everyone has partners, who are better, at least most of them.
So why can't my partner just change to the better while still being in a relationship with me?
Because they have to learn that a relationship is something you could lose.
You can lose your partner forever.
So even if you improve as a person, and go back to the same partner, you won't really realize how much you can lose by messing up.
And as long as one hasn't experienced that, they might not be able to make some real effort.
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
Len oogle:
1. Ich hasse es, wenn Kindern als dümmer dargestellt werden, als sie sind, und ihnen ihre Rechte auf Selbstbestimmung abgesprochen werden. Diese Art von Diskriminierung ist viel ausgeprägter in Deutschland als die bekannten Arten.
2. Vor allem gebildete Eltern wissen meist besser, was gut für ihre Kinder ist, und andere Eltern meist auch.
Oft unterscheiden sich Kinder, die nicht zur Schule gehen nicht essentiell von anderen Kindern, sind teils sogar gebildeter, weil sie vorwiegend das lernen, was sie interessiert oder was wichtig für sie ist.
Es gibt genügend Möglichkeiten, Abschlüsse zu machen. Und auch ohne Abschluss kann man gute Stellen bekommen. Man braucht nur programmieren zu können, dann bekommt man schon etwas relativ gutes.
Das wird an Schulen nicht beigebracht, aber wenn Kinder mehr Freizeit haben, kommen bestimmt öfter welche auf die Idee, sich das selbst beizubringen, schon allein, um Mods für Minecraft zu schreiben, oder sowas.
Aber auch sonst wollen Eltern oft nur das beste für ihr Kind. Selbst in Entwicklungsländern, wo es keine Schulpflicht gibt, gehen die Meisten Kinder in Schulen, weil die Eltern wollen, dass die Kinder es später mal besser haben als sie.
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
16:40 Rust is also pretty authoritarian. You /could/ use a fork of Serde, but then YOUR serde types are not compatible with the serde types of the other library.
You really have to decide. Do you want your own system, or do you want to use the system everyone else uses.
You could also fork every lib you use and make them use your serde fork.
It's mostly because of the orphan rules. I love them, but sometimes I hate them.
I guess, that's the main reason why people coordinate to use the same crates.
In most languages you would just implement serde for all the types you import, if they don't already implement them.
In Rust, it's pretty annoying, so you'd rather demand everyone to use the serialization library you use for your crate.
That forces everyone to use the same library. If you don't use it, you are excluded by parts of the ecosystem. And I consider that some kind of authoritarianism.
It might be effective to coordinate on some specific systems, but it takes away some of your freedom.
You either have to obey, or you have to do your own thing almost completely.
You can't just implement your serde fork for each type form other libraries.
You /could/ do it if you derive every library you use inside your serde fork itself, but that's far from scalable. You're never done.
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
I think, only a language with a similar feature set as C will be able to replace C.
Most important:
* no GC
* static types
* no RAII (like Rust has)
But some things might be improved:
* arrays as function parameters are currently interpreted as pointers
* maybe pointer dereferencing could be simplified (a.b on pointers would just be &a->b, and *a.b would be a->b or (*a).b)
* maybe "loop" like in rust would be a nice addition
* explicit types for every variable are currently necessary and could be removed
And generally, the syntax could be changed a bit, or what I'd prefer, the language should be defined in terms of a tree, and there could be multiple syntaxes for that language (one similar to current C, one simple s expression based like lisp, one indentation based like python, one visual language, etc.)
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Kann mir vorstellen, dass diese Korrelation beidseitig ist. Wenn man überdurchschnittlich intelligent ist, findet man schwieriger Menschen, die zu einem passen, wenn man introvertiert ist, und die Zeit lieber alleine verbringt, beschäftigt man sich eher mit Dingen, die Intelligenz erfordern (alleine spielt man eher selten Gesellschaftsspiel oder betrinkt sich, dass man mal etwas liest oder videos ansieht, die einem etwas beibringen, oder sich mit subjektiv interessanten Dingen intensiv beschäftigt, tut man wohl meist nur allein)
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Oh, my result is 100.
I reinstalled my system a few months ago.
In my old home directory it's even 300.
I guess, part of the reason is, that my screenshots done with "import name.png" land in home.
After moving them, it's only 83.
I also have a few random text files in my home, which I stored in home directly because of convenience.
After moving them, it's only 71.
And most of them are some config files or directories (the ones starting with a dot): 48
Then I have a few other files (one video, one pdf, one text document without an ending, and similar, less then 10).
And a few directories, which were mostly there form the beginning, but also some, I added for my own needs (bin, Blender, Unity).
6
-
6
-
6
-
1:20 That's something I recently started to do more organized.
I always wrote down my ideas, but only in order to go into detail. First I only used paper, then I used text documents, but only recently I started to write down some of my ideas in a central place, which is synchronize using git. I'm mostly talking about stories. Often I just write down the idea itself, sometimes just one title line, often also a bit of context. Basically everything I have in mind mostly unfiltered.
Some time ago, when I had an idea, I tried to create something out of it. Instead of just writing down the idea, I strated writing a story. And I thought about an introduction. I wrote the introduction, and sometimes I just wrote an introduction without even arriving at my core idea. Sometimes the intro even went somewhere else.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
2:00 That's basically how I'm writing now. I get an idea, I only write down what I have in mind, I'm not required to finish this scene yet. This really helps me to get started, especially since I sorted my scenes, so I know which scenes are unfinished.
Sometimes it's just a single line of text, sometimes it's a few key points, sometimes it's a pretty long key point list describing the scene very detailed, just without caring about the exact wording or if something necessary is missing between the key points.
Sometimes I write down the first half of a scene, or the core part of a scene which still needs some proper introduction and ending, sometimes I get more ideas during writing and I write everything down completely.
When I'm not really inspired to write, I can still finish some of these drafts by converting key points into real text, which is often pretty straightforward the more detailed it is, or just rereading one of the basically finished scenes and maybe adding some introduction, fixing typos, adding important lines inbetween, or improving some sections I don't like anymore.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
3:00 The task I'm currently doing is writing, which most of the is easier than most other tasks I'd do (programming, drawing, creating 3D characters)
And I write multiple stories at once, so if I don't know further in one story, I just switch to another one. I always choose the one I'm most motivated in or where I know clearly how to progress.
So whenever I get an idea, I write it down as exactly as it's currently in my mind. When I'm motivated I think of a general plan on what should happen in some specific story.
When I'm not that motivated, I write stories, which I already wrote down in an abstract way before.
When I'm not motilated at all, I just proofread existing stories and mark them an finished.
Each accomplished task keeps my motivation going or even increases it, so it never stops completely.
I have a overcomplicated system to manage all this, which sometimes forces me to focus on another story, which motivates me even more to write more stories. I have to continue writing stories, I started, in order to be allowed to start new stories. And I have to start writing new stories or continue short stories in order to be allowed to continue existing stories.
I even wrote a small program to show me how many stories are allowed to be started and how scenes each story is allowed to have by now.
So when I actively forbid myself to write something I want, I want to write it all the more. Usually I would just start writing that and realize it's too difficult, and motivation goes down.
What now happens instead, I write what I'm not that motivated in, in order to be able to write again what I really want to write. This way the motivation doesn't go down when it's difficult.
I write other stories which I also want to get out there, the motivation to write the stories I really want to grows and grows and I get new ideas. So when I'm allowed to write it again, the motivation is usually higher.
Or sometimes I'm still more motivated to continue writing the other story which is not allowed anymore, and only write it in order to be able to write other stories.
And I have different systems which encourage me to write more.
The more I have written in advance, the more I'm allowed to publish. I'm not allowed to just publish everything just after I finished.
And I'm only allowed to publish scenes of the story which has the most stories written in advance, so if I want to publish a specific scene as soon as possible, I also have to continue writing that specific story.
It sounds unneccessary, but it works pretty well.
And this way I'll be getting all interesting ideas I ever had, out without having to finish anything.
5
-
5:30 As a developer, I also often do changes, which don't really add any features, especially when I didn't work on a project for months/years.
When I look at the project I often realize some thinks:
- oh, I didn't do auto formatting back then
- nowadays I would format this differently
- I should update all my dependencies and see if it still works, maybe do minor changes to make it work again
- I learned about a new feature, so I refactor all the places where this feature can be used
- I should do a little refactor, all this code, which is in one file, doesn't have to be in one file
- looks like I didn't do proper error handling here and there; it doesn't really matter since in the end, the program just panics, but I do it anyway
- before I can add a new feature here, I have to refactor this whole system, else adding new features won't be scalable
And in a few days, I might do dozens of commits which don't change anything.
Sometimes this motivates me to continue work on the project, but most often not.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Dass der Bürgermeister nicht bereit ist, mit der FDP zu reden, ist zwar nicht gut, aber Herr Lindner hat dasselbe gemacht, was die AfD angeht.
Nicht, dass ich das per se schlecht finde, aber dann müsste man sich eben mit mindestens genausogroßer Sicherheit dagegen aussprechen, mit linken zu koalieren. Aber damit könnte man ja wähler verlieren. Sich gegen die AfD auszusprechen bringt einem mehr Zustimmung als Verluste. Und dass die FDP nicht mit den linken koalieren würden, ist ja eh offensichtlich für Leute, die ein bisschen Ahnung haben (also Linke merken das vielleicht gar nicht). Wenn das die Denkweise dahinter ist, dann macht das mir die FDP wieder sympathischer. Nicht, dass ich solche Taktiken gut finde, aber sie sind vermutlich notwendig, um sich gegen emotionalisierende Parteien durchzusetzen.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Das ist wohl auch das Hauptproblem. Niemand versteht, warum die Politiker so handeln, wie sie handeln. Man kann keinen Plan dahinter erkennen, zumindest keinen, um Corona einzudämmen oder zu besiegen
Zum Teil auch, weil wir noch eine Demokratie haben, und so aus in sich vielleicht konsistenten Konzepten nicht das beste gewählt wird, sondern von jedem ein paar Punkte.
Und vor allem, dass man sich nicht darauf verlassen kann, was gesagt wird.
Wenn man schon weiß, dass ein Lockdown vermutlich länger dauern soll, dann kann man doch auch gleich sagen, dass es länger wird, und nicht immer irgendwelche falschen Hoffnungen machen.
4
-
Maybe that feels common, when you are from a country, where they call "50 Dollars" $50.
At least it's common in Germany to put the currency after the count (50$, 50€, 50¥, etc.).
And when talking about common units (feet, meters, liters) almost everyone would probably put the unit afterwards.
Besides that, it's just the way you speak. It's the same order. You don't say "Percentage 50" as you don't say "Dollar 50".
The fact, that it reminds you of declaring a variable would rather be an argument against using this notation.
I would just put the unit after the number, no matter what the unit is, for consistency reasons.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
8:15 Yup, that's how things should be done. Always be more restrictive by default, and in order to allow more, you have to add more code.
That has been my philosophy since I'm using Rust. Or when I think about it, even before I started using Rust.
I defned some language for stories, where you can define something like this:
a -> b | c -> d
Which means "Scene a first, then either scene b or c, then scene d"
And if you defined "a -> b & c -> d", it means the same, but "both, scene b AND c"
But when you define both of these at once, always the less restrictive variant is used, which means, after a comes b AND c, but d only needs b OR c to be finished.
Not exactly the same, but probably similar.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
It would be so useful to be able to use any text to generate a wallet, so you won't lose your money, when you lose your data, just like in NXT/Ardor.
In NXT/Ardor I use a long sentence with punctuation, noone would ever say, in my native language, as a password, so I will always have access to my wallet, and don't have to care about it, when I reinstall my system or get a new PC or whatever. And I always forget the 20 words or lose the paper, where I wrote them down.
Also writing them down isn't that secure, I guess.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
13:45 "food production is additive"
What does this even mean? Does this make sense at all?
That's not just not a simplification of how the world works. This doesn't tell me anything about the world?
Am I just stupid? Is his explanation more accurate than the explanation in this video, so I can't understand it without context?
There are multiple factors you could take into account for food production:
1. better technology, more food
2. more humans, more work, more food
3. more land, more food
Another thing, that could be taken into account, is, that less food might be needed:
1. better technology, healthier food, less food needed
2. evolution/genetic modification, less food needed
3. intelligence/awareness about health, less food needed
I think, I get it now. If there are N humans, there will be N * X humans in the next generation.
If there is N food now, there will be N + X food in the next year.
So food does not depend on the currently existing food, while human reproduction does.
That's not true in both cases. Both, food (plants/animals) work the same as humans. You can only create more food, if you already have some food.
And if you have more food, you will have more seeds and can plant more food.
But both humans and food will slowly stop reproducing when there is not enough space or food for them.
So it both cases, it's a more complicated function, probably containing the N as a factor.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
After reading the description of the Pokete „Horny“, which is a teenage unicorn, it got into my mind, that Pokemon levels are typical ages of humans (up to about 100).
Maybe some game would be nice, where you have a team of humans, and instead of a level, there's an age.
But a higher level/age always has both advantages and disadvantages. Younger ones are best to learn new stuff, mid age ones have the best values (attack, mobility), and old ones have the most experience.
You might be some kind of super human, who cannot die. You need to impregnate other humans to get new team members, and you use them as some kind of slave. They always follow you around, just like Pokemon unless you let them free.
3
-
3
-
3
-
9:55 When I was new to Rust, I didn't fear using references, even if they had lifetime annotations. Now, years later, I try to avoid explicit lifetimes alltogether and only use them if there is no chance to avoid them.
But there are a few cases where I really want lifetime annotations, especially in structs. Normally when I want some kind of accessor to some data, which should not be modified or go out of scope as long as the accessor exists.
For example I used this to call some function safely. Calling the function is only safe if I specify a valid parameter. So instead of calling the function directly, I created a struct, which lists all valid parameters, and in order to call it, I only specify the index of the parameter I want to call.
But iterators are also a good example for this.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@NoBoilerplate
After stopping using Lisp, I switched between Rust and Scopes for some time.
I've been the only user for some time besides the developer.
I ended up with only using Rust for now though, mostly because it's cleaner (like orphan rules; in Scopes I can just import a module which overwrites some of my methods without letting me know. I don't feel safe anymore).
Scopes is still the most powerful language, I think. It has all the features of major programming languages, most interesting for you, it's S-Expression based, has Lisp macros, and a Rust borrow checker (version 2, only one level of borrowed data, no structs or tuples containing borrowed data).
It's even more low level than C (by default values are not even on the stack but in the registers and immutable).
And more high level than Lisps. Even a new kind of macro, which has access to type information and is able to do partial evaluation.
It's the only language, where I was able to write a compile time dimension and type generic automatically typed geometric algebra library with versor tracking.
And probably the only language where this is even possible theoretically, besides C++ maybe.
It's difficult to keep it short when talking/writing about Scopes ;)
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3:00 I think, the best argument for command line is , that you can just copy-paste commands instead of clicking through GUis.
Especially if you don't know, what you are doing, you can just google the command, or a coworker can send you the command, and then you paste it and it probably does, what you want.
Maybe you have to insert the correct filenames or something.
Or especially when using AI, you can just ask the AI "how to resize all your images in one folder and subfolders to a maximum of 1920×1080 without changing the aspect ratio in the fish shell", and it probably gives you a command, which just works.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
When I found out you could create video games yourself, I knew I wanted to do that.
Even long before, when I was still in Kindergarten I already started to draw some game maps on papers, which I let family members "play" (they had to move their fingers along the paper; inspired by Zelda guides, where I "played" the game the same way, when I didn't play it for real).
I also played stories inspired by Mario and Zelda when outside. Some of my adventures had some interesting concepts, like all the boss rooms became part of the boss tower.
So after finding out, I thought about how games would work internally. And it didn't seem too difficult. What would you have to tell some computer if a character jumps into water? It just switches controls if the character is below the surface.
And when in school, I started programming (I didn't learn much of the programming in school itself, mostly at home).
First Game Maker for some years, then I experimented using popular languages like Java (which we had to learn at school), C++ and Go, then I stuck with Common lisp for a few years, which is where I probably learnt the most, and then I stopped losing interest because it's inefficient by default, and had another phase of trying and learning a lot of programming languages, until I got into Rust, which I now use for most of my private projects.
At the end of my Lisp phase, I also became kind of depressed and didn't see a reason in gamedev anymore. Games could never be as accurate as reality.
Also because of being in university and some personal identity problems and some unhealthy lifestyle.
Besides that, I work as a game developer now using Unity, which I never used in private before :)
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
8:00 When I talk to people anonymously online, I already do it that way.
I don't know them, I don't really care about them.
Not sure, if I really had a conversation about that specific topic.
But I'd probably say something like that:
"Yeah, you're right. There is no purpose in life. So suicide sounds like an easy way out. I also kind of thought about suicide some time ago. But I didn't really see a reason. I can also just wait until I die. Life isn't that bad, and nowadays I'm even pretty happy. If I really considered killing myself, I'd rather just try dangerous stuff, I wouldn't normally do, maybe dangerous stuff, which could kill me, or criminal stuff or talking to women in public..."
3
-
3
-
Wenn es um wirtschaftliche Freiheit geht ist die PDV wohl wirklcih sehr rechts, rechter als NPD oder ähnliche, die ja wirklich teils eher linkes Gedankengut tragen. Die sind halt vor allem Autoritär, nicht rechts.
Ich habe bei der PDV die Befürchtung, dass sie den Staat zu sehr abbauen wollen, aber im Grunde bin ich schon für mehr in Richtung der persönlichen Freiheit, statt viele Absicherungen durch den Staat, die teils sowieso nicht funktionieren werden, und da die PDV sowieso keine große Mehrheit bekommen wird, und es auch nichts bringt, Parteien zu wählen, die sowieso nur kleine Abweichungen in die richtige Richtung zu den regierenden Parteien haben, dürfte es kein Fehler sein, die PDV zu wählen.
2
-
Joufa Xerxes: Sehe ich anders. Wenn eine Partei nur zum Teil mit einem übereinstimmt, braucht man sie erst gar nicht wählen. Ich hab auch nochmal beim Wahlomat geschaut. Die PDV ist halt bei weitem über der FDP, die auch relativ weit oben ist. Aber ein paar wichtige Punkte sieht die FDP völlig anders als ich.
Die FDP will die Verteidigungsausgaben erhöhen. Auch die dort beschriebene Begründung ist für mich nicht nachvollziehbar. Ich glaube nicht, dass mehr Verteidigungsausgaben zu mehr Sicherheit führen. Zudem würde das Geld wohl aus Steuern kommen. Dabei ist doch die FDP die Partei, die Steuern eher Senken will. Zu wessen Lasten?
Zudem ist die FDP für eine Impfpflicht für Kinder. Impfungen sind sehr risikobehaftet, vor allem bei Kindern, und es ist Körperverletzung. Krankheiten und giftige Substanzen werden unter die Haut gespritzt um resistent gegen Krankheiten zu machen. Das verhindert zwar, dass sich diese Krankheiten verbreiten, schadet aber auch der geimpften Person, vor allem, wenn sie dann nichtmal Kontakt zu dieser Krankheit haben wird. Insbesondere bei Kleinkindern werden besonders viele Schadstoffe gespritzt, da sonst das Immunsystem keine Reaktion zeigt. Das sollten die Eltern entscheiden, inwieweit sie das Risiko oder den Nutzen für sinnvoller halten. Aber eine Pflicht ist im allgemeinen nie liberal.
Dann ist die FDP auch für Projekte gegen Rechtsextremismus. Dass Rechtsextremismus schlecht ist, weiß doch eh schon jeder. Wenn, dann sollte man auch mal gegen andere gefährliche Extremismen Projekte machen, wie Islamismus, Linksextremismus, (Liberalismus? ^^) etc.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
9:00 One important thing, which helps me to go to bed earlier, is having a laptop.
It seems contraproductive at first, but when I didn't have a proper laptop for some time, I knew, I would not be able to do anything on my device, when I turn it off.
So I knew, I had to watch this video now, or finish writing this segment, or make this program work, or whatever I wanted to do, because I wouldn't be able to until tomorrow.
And since I want to get enough sleep, I didn't expect to have time in the next morning before work to finish it.
So when having a laptop, especially one I can set to standby mode over night, makes it easy to lay it away, so I think, even if I can't sleep, I will be able to do something instead. And when I already lie in bed and put my laptop away, because I'm getting tired, I can just start to sleep. I don't have to get into bed, maybe also get dressed or whatever, which makes me awake again.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@legrandliseurtri7495 I agree. If it's in a fictional world, I would always call it fantasy, though.
But I don't like adding too common fantasy elements.
For example the common fantasy races aren't that interesting (elves, dwarfs, etc.), especially if it's a typical medival setting.
Adding new races doesn't seem too interesting to me anymore. Why do you need them? Most of the time, you could also just add a new country or tribe of normal humans, who just have a different culture.
I prefer realistic fantasy worlds. Magic is fine to me, but I prefer more physics based magic systems (energy preservation) and only use it, when there is no good explanation using physics. So Sci-Fi is often better. But without space travel preferably.
One of my recent ideas for a fantasy world is not like most fantasy worlds, which add new races, creatures, magic and technologies. Mine only has one race, which has only one gender, no differences in age, no other animals, only one edible food...
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I think, there is still potetntial for a general purpose programming language having more influences from natural language, but not how the old approaches worked.
The old programming language, which tried to make programming languages more like natural languages, did it, by translating function calls and macros to a limited set of common phrases, often making it less flexible and clear. I think, SQL is a good example, even if not a general purpose language.
I would rather try to add features of natural language into programming languages.
The most important feature of natural languages, which has not been implemented in any programming language, is a way to nest complex phrases without the need of explicit brackets (might be words, which act like brackets).
In natural language, every word has some implicit relation. An adjective (A) always relates to the next object, which might consist of multiple words. In some languages a verb (V) at the end of a sentence or subsentence ends it. And relative pronouns (R) start a new subsentence. And Nouns (N) represent simple objects.
So lets assume, we have a sentence of this structure:
N1 A1 N2 R1 A2 A3 N3 N4 V1 V2
By strictly applying the rules (the description would have to be more accurate, but you should get the point), the nesting (restructured, so the verbs are written like function calls) would be something like this:
V2(N1, A1(N2), V2(R1, A2(A3(N3)), N4)
Even if it's not english grammer, I can try to insert some english words:
English: I like the blue boat, which swims from the great island fast.
Structure: I blue boat which from great island fast swim like.
Nesting: Like(I, blue(boat), swim(which, from(great(island)), fast)
(I know, "fast" is not a noun, and "from" is not an adjective, but it's difficult to have complex sentences, which use a structure like this and make sense.)
So how would I use this in a programming languare?
I'd add about three kinds of words, one which opens a bracket (like R), one which closes a bracket (like V) and one, which does none of it or both (like N or A). Maybe more.
And everything you define will belong to one of these word kind.
2
-
@michaelastockbauer672 Ein Impfchip würde ja sowieso nur überwachen, welche Impfungen bereits getäigt wurden, oder?
Und was die sonstige Überwachung angeht, bin ich sowieso hier mit einem nicht besonders anonymen Account und nutze Smartphones nur wenn nötig. Für unterwegs hab ich jetzt wieder ein Tastenhandy.
Mich stört dabei vor allem die Einstellung, dass eine Impfung nötig ist, um das loszuwerden, und es so wirkt, dass Alternativen nicht ernsthaft in Betracht gezogen werden. Beispielsweise, dass irgendwann der Großteil der Bevölkerung immun wird, was ja im Grunde das ist, was die Impfung auch machen würde. Oder eben ein anderes Mittel. Ein Mittel, das sonst gegen Malaria eingsetzt wird, soll ja gut helfen.
2
-
2
-
2
-
9:15 I don't think, it's in general a good idea to remove file interactions from unit tests.
If it's just short strings or a few lines, sure. But if I really need to read in larger data formats, I don't want to add them into my code, but rather have them in separate files.
Else I might even mess up the format, I want to parse (for example when the parsed format and the language I use both support strings surrounded by quotes and escape characters, I can't just write the content of a file down).
I'd prefer to have them in real files. Maybe they could even inlined into the file at compile time and not really be read at runtime, but I don't think, this would make such a huge difference.
Besides I'm not sure if writing a file system abstaction, which can be used everywhere, where a normal file can be used, will not cause other problems and make some of the code far more complicated and maybe even less performant. Java is probably an exception, where this works well, and only, because the performance reducing features are activated by default (in this case virtual method inheritance).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Wenn es ein staatliches Gesundheitssystem gibt, wie wird dann festgestellt, ob ein Arzt gute Arbeit macht?
Ich fände eher was in die Richtung gut, dass möglichst viel von den Ärzten preisgegeben wird, insbesondere die Gestorben-Geheilt-Rate, und für jeden Todesfall muss eine Rechtfertigung kommen, wo sich die potentiellen Kunden selbst informieren können, und der Rest wird dann Marktwirtschaftlich beschlossen.
Man braucht diese Regelungen vermutlich nicht, da sobald man eine hinreichende Auswahl zwischen Ärzten hat, die ihre Daten preisgeben, wird man sich kaum noch von einem anderen Arzt operieren lassen.
Die staatliche Lösung macht ja offensichtlich auch Probleme.
Wenn man mit dem Arzt sprechen will, ist er nicht da, er ist, zumindest systemisch gesehen, nicht übermäßig am überleben der Patienten interessiert, etc.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2:44 No, that's not true. It doesn't matter too much if my data is stored in plain text or in a binary format. If the data is complicated, it's always better to use a tool.
And as long as you know the structure of a file, you can write new programs to use the same binary format. I've done that.
I've written a project called pns (published on gitlab), for simulating petri nets, which uses a binary format. I already had created a similar tool before, which was already more powerful. So I used the old tool to create the petri net, saved it using the binary format, and then loaded it from the binary format into the new program.
If you know the binary format, it's much easier to create new tools to read and write the data. No need to write complicated parsers yourself or use serialization 4lugins.
4:22 Okay, it seems to be about text heavy data. In that I agree. These should always be stored in a non-binary format (markdown, latex, html, etc.).
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
27:10 I and my mother had a similar experience, when I went to kindergarten for the first time.
I was 3, but I remember it very well.
She brought me there and I already started to play. I showed my mom some device I found. She wanted to go, so I just wanted to show her one more time. My mom knew that, but the kindergardener said, that she should go home now, else this would have gone on forever.
My mother went home and cried for some hours, I also cried a lot for some time.
I don't think, it was the right choice. I would have shown it to her once again, and I would be happy. I knew, she would leave eventually. I wasn't stupid.
I'm probably traumatized from this situation, why else would I still remember it?
I'd even say, sending me to kindergarten at all wasn't a good choice. I always played by myself, never with other children. Especially not with other boys. They were just too loud. I liked some of the girls, but I can't remember any interaction.
Often I just counted up to 100 until the time was up. I was proud for being able to do that, but when thinking about it now, it's kind of sad.
The only friends I got in kindergarten were from meets at home arranged by my mother.
Normally if you didn't like something when you were a child, when you get older you start to appreciate it in the hindsight and think, it was necessary. But that's definitely not the case for kindergarten.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@NoBoilerplate Rust macros are far from powerful enough.
I could technically create a macro which generates all types for N-Dimensional GA.
But then if multiple libraries use this macro, these libraries will be incompatible, since both generate their own multivector types.
Besides that, I have to choose a dimension in advance. The number of multivector types for each dimension N is at least 2^N.
It's technically possible, but it's not great.
What's great about scopes is that there are macros, which return types and memoize their results.
So if I have a multivector type as a macro (for example a quaternion MultiVector!<e, e12, e13, e23>), it would implicitly create the type definition only once at toplevel, and every usage of this macro will refer to the same type.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Isn't it a good workflow to merge develop into your feature branch at least once a day? It's similar to CI, but other people won't be disrupted by having to relearn changes of an unfinished feature.
For example, I rename a method and add a few similar methods and then remove some, I don't want to be used, after I'm sure, which are the best methods.
If I do CI, everyone has to learn the new methods, if they need one of them, and maybe they use one, I want to remove later, but can't anymore because it alreaty has been used.
So I just merge the develop every few hours, so I see, nothing breaks, and when my feature is finished, I merge it to develop.
2
-
2
-
2
-
40:45 Not true. If I care about my art, I definitely won't draw it myself. Because it doesn't look good.
I might use 3D, AI, or pay artists, depending on what's the best outcome, what's closest to my idea.
If I draw it myself, I will just draw the core details, which I care about. But that's not what I want.
If I want a preson, I usually want generic eyes, generic feet. And maybe mostly generic clothes, which fit some description, depending on the context. That's all I want. I don't care about each detail of my art. Even if I pay artists to do it, they won't be able to do everything exactly how I want it. It would probably get pretty expensive. And in the end, I would have to create everything myself.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Die Argumentation ist unstimmig.
Ausländer sind ungebildet, und machen deshalb nur die einfachen arbeiten. Wenn ein Deutscher genausogut geeignet ist, wird der Deutsche genommen.
Ausländer geben sich mit weniger Geld zufrieden, daher werden die Löhne geringer für solche einfachen Aufgaben, und insbesondere Deutsche meiden dadurch solche Arbeiten.
Ausländer haben so also vor allem die schlecht bezahlten Berufe von den Deutschen weggenommen, und dadurch eben auch einen geringeren Durchschnittslohn.
Natürlich kann das auch anders sein, um dazu etwas aussagekräftiges beitragen zu können, benötigt man mehr Zahlen.
Ich fände es sinnvoller, Flüchtlingen gar kein Geld zu geben, sondern nur eine Wohnung und Lebensmittelversorgung. In vielen Ländern werden die Leute ja auch angeworben, dass man sie in Deutschland braucht.
Das Beispiel mit der Familie ist eben nicht der Normalfall. Das meiste sind alleinstehende junge Männer. Wenn man im Krieg ist, und das Geld aufbringen kann, nur eine oder wenige Leute zu retten, wenn schickt man dann in ein sicheres Land? Die Großeltern? Frau und Kinder? Nein, den jungen Mann, der sich bei gewaltsamen Übergriffen noch am ehesten wehren könnte.
2
-
What I dislike about most OO languges:
# No way to define simple functions
There might be static methods, but they still have to belong to a specific class, which often does not make sense.
In such cases, I "misuse" classes as modules, but it's often a lot of boiler plate code in this case (`public static`).
# To which object does a method belong?
Or I know, it should be a method, but don't know, of which of the objects. There are many posibilities, but none of them seems preferable.
As long as I don't need dispatch, functions are often the way to go.
Else it's pretty clear unless I need multiple dispatch, which also doesn't exist in most OO langugaes.
# Being able to overwrite any method
I think, methods should never be able to be overwritten in general.
There's one exception: Default methods. Some method of an abstract class, which is explicitly meant to be overwritten. (any virtual method in an abstract class)
And there could be empty method definitions, which can be defined in a child class (empty virtual methods).
And they can only be overwritten once by an inheriting class. If you need to overwrite something twice, something is wrong with your code.
Instead of overwriting methods, I like the idea of methods, which extend the behavior of the parent but without changing it (see method combinations), but most of the time, this is too complicated.
In cases, you want to extend behavior multiple times, it's probably the best to add a new virtual methods in child objects. This way it's not allowed to accidently forget to call the parent method, which often seems like boilerplate anyway.
2
-
2
-
Bei mir wird die Anzahl der Dislikes gar nicht angezeigt.
Kann mir auch vorstellen, dass Leute es negativ bewerten, weil sie die Situation doof finden.
Ist oft unklar, was man da überhaupt bewertet.
Vor allem, wenn jemand unkommentiert einen besonders schlimmen Ausschnitt hochlädt, im Stil „Schau mal, was für einen Unsinn die Nachrichten schon wieder gebracht haben“
Wenn ich es nun negativ bewerte, liegt es dann daran, dass ich den Inhalt schlecht finde, oder dass ich es schlecht finde, dass er das neu hochläd, um einen Ausschnitt zu verwenden, um die Sendung unverdient in ein schlechtes Licht zu rücken?
Wenn ich es positiv bewerte, liegt es daran, dass mir bewusst ist, dass er es hochgeladen hat, weil er es schlimm findet, und auf diesen Missstand aufmerksam machen will, oder weil ich die Nachrichten gut und informativ fand?
Oder die Leute bewerten schon aus Prinzip alles von den Staatsmedien negativ.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1:25 That's bullshit. An ASIC miner is not a money printer.
Mining is still only worth it if the energy is cheap. It doesn't matter if you use ASICs or regular CPUs.
Just in order to mine CCs, where ASICs exist for, mining is not profitable if you don't have an ASIC.
Except in places, where the energy is basically free. In these cases, it might still be profitable, but much more profitable when using ASICs.
So only the entry hurdle is higher. But for most people, mining can't be profitable anyway, at least not in the long term. You basically need to overproduce energy regularly.
And there's also a huge benefit when having to use ASICs. If someone buys a lot of ASICs to harm a cryptocurrency, it's much more expensive than just being able to use CPUs or GPUs. People and companies don't already have mining ASICs lying around somewhere if they don't already mine a specific CC. And if you own ASICs for a specific CC, you have no interest in harming a CC. If the CC is harmed, if it's worth less, mining is less profitalbe and less ASICs are needed, so you couldn't even sell these ASICs profitable. And the CC might even be able to regenerate as soon as you stop the attack. It would be an economical disaster to do this.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Was soll daran außergewöhnlich sein? Die Verhaltensweisen sind völlig nachvolziehbar.
Die Linken stellen einen Kandidaten, sonst niemand. Daher fühlt sich die AfD gezwungen, selbst einen Kandidaten zu stellen, in der Hoffnung, dass vielleicht doch jemand aus den anderen Parteien so vernünftig ist, keinen Linken zu wählen.
Die FDP stellt darauf einen Kandidaten und bietet so den weniger links ausgerichteten Politikern eine Alternative, die auch genutzt wird. Die AfD wählt nun natürlich nicht den AfD-Kandidaten, weil klar ist, dass niemand sonst jemanden von der AfD wählen wird, und sie verlieren werden, und wählen stattdessen den FDP-Kandidaten, der vermutlich zumindest noch von den FDP-Mitgliedern gewählt wird.
Den gewählten AfD-Politikern, die an der Wahl des Präsidenten teilgenommen haben, jetzt irgendwas zu unterstellen, und noch schlimmer, dem FDP-Politiker, der gewählt worden ist, zu unterstellen, von wem er Gewählt worden ist, auch wenn er darauf keinen direkten Einfluss hat ist zwar eine valide Taktik, die offenbar auch funktioniert, aber eben völlig bescheuert, wenn man auf diese Taktik hereinfällt...
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Was ist denn das für ein "Experte", der da eingeladen wird?
Das, was er sagt, ist doch schon klar. Dass vor allem alte sterben, ist schon lange bekannt. Dass Flüchtlinge besonders häufig sterben, wundert mich auch nicht.
Das einzige, worum es geht, ist doch, dass das Gesundheitssystem nicht überlastet wird, und solange das gelingt, ist es doch offensichtlich ein Erfolg.
Es sei denn, man spricht sich für eine andere Strategie aus, aber davon hat er nichts gesagt, also gehe ich davon aus, dass er auch dieser allgemein anerkannten Strategie folgt.
Und wenn die Maßnahmen nicht so streng sind, und sich so die Krankheit schneller verbreitet, sterben natürlich auch mehr Leute an der Krankheit, aber die negativen Effekte der Maßnahmen werden eben drastisch reduziert.
Da muss man eben abwägen.
Aber wenn man davon ausgeht, dass sich die Krankheit sowieso nur langsamer verbreitet, dann kann man auch davon ausgehen, dass die meisten dieser Leute sowieso in der nächsten Zeit an der Krankheit gestorben wären, da sie ja durch ein intaktes Gesundheitssystem nicht gerettet werden konnten.
Zu starke Maßnahmen haben auch nicht nur soziale und wirtschaftliche Folgen, sondern werden dazu führen, dass die Zahl der Infektionen sogar wieder sinkt, sodass das Gesundheitssystem nichtmal annähernd ausgelastet sein wird und die Dauer, bis man die Maßnahmen wieder lockern kann, noch weiter erhöht wird.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
29:27 Maybe sometimes it's good to have a weighted average of stories over a weird choice?
I usually write things myself, but I'm playing around with AI and want to use it for writing instead of my own style, especially for generic scenes, which have to be written, but I'm not really motivated to.
My own style is closer to simple video game writing than novels.
I usually prefer that style. But I think, most people prefer a more generic style.
I don't think, just letting an AI rewrite my story in a more generic style is the best option.
But maybe in some cases, it's better to be generic than special.
So what I'm going to do is probably writing a detailed description of the key points myself, letting the AI fill in the blanks, and then rework it to fit my own more special style, while leaving in some of the interesting choices and phrases, I didn't care nor think about myself.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@NoBoilerplate
>better ... in some areas
Feature-wise it's better in almost all areas.
It just isn't as clean as Rust, no focus on safety, etc. (also no orphan rules)
The main reason, I don't use it anymore.
>I note there's no macros
There are macros in Scopes.
Three different kinds of macros even.
The documentation is probably still missing a lot.
inline, which is a function partially evaluated at compile time, more like templates than inline functions
sugar, which is like lisp macros (transform one expression into another one, just syntactic sugar)
spice, which has access to type information and evaluated constants at compile time.
It's the only langugae where I was able to implement geometric algebra, generic (at compile time) over dimensions and types.
It also uses llvm vectors internally, important for addition and is able to track if a a multi vector is a versor at compile time for further optimizations.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
There's also one huge argument against Monero, probably the most important, and I don't think, it has been solved yet.
Since Monero doesn't require specialized hardware and just allows the usage of regular computers, attacking Monero would be rather cheap.
There are a lot of companies and governments who already have computers, so if just one huge company, or maybe a few, try to attack Monero, it would totally work. It wouldn't be a huge cost.
You could even buy more hardware if necessary. You could still resell the hardware.
In Bitcoin on the other hand, if you buy a lot of hardware just to destroy Bitcoin, all the hardware will be useless after Bitcoin is dead. You can't use it for other things or resell it.
But now after writing it out in my own words, I don't really believe in it. You can't kill a network through computation power. The only thing you can do is a so called "51% attack", which basically only allows you to do double spends. And as long as you stop computing, the network will start running again.
Someone would have to run devices constantly. That's true for both Bitcoin AND Monero. And they always lose money from running the network this way. As soon as they stop attacking the network, the regular miners might come back. And in the future mining will only be worth it if the energy used for it basically costs nothing or less because you can't use it for anything else. So even governments and companies would need to have a lot of free energy to be slightly profitable. Else they will run out of money very quickly.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
20:30 Doesn't work for me like this. If there is a small task, I'm not really motivated to do it.
I just think "It's so easy to do that. I could also do it tomorrow.", "I don't have to clean my room up now, I will have to do it tomorrow again anyway.", "I was planning only 20 push ups per week. And it's Moday. I still have some days left. And 20 per week won't affect me anyway.", "I could finish writing my tool now, but I don't even know what I will do then, so I'll just ".
The task needs to be huge enough to get me motivated. And when I'm motivated, it will not just be a side task, but my main task for that day. I want to finish it, no matter what.
I have to think, it's difficult to get it done, but it should be possible this day/week/month. But in order to finish it, I first have to do this and that and whatever.
So I start working, I want to finish it, since I know, I won't when I stop once. I do the first step, the second step, and after some time I realize, I can't do it, it's not worth it, my motivation is suddenly gone.
But suddenly my room is mostly clean, and I reordered a few things, even if I didn't get to move my furniture around.
Suddenly I'm pretty muscular, even if I only fulfilled half of the intended training I planned.
I finished writing some tools and libraries which I can be used for a lot of applications and learnt a few libraries and programming techniques, even if I didn't finish creating the program I originally intended.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@UCDbmy_j5jnYXFF4j63QtZ_A
Ein bisschen viel Text für das, was ich geschrieben hab, und hat auch nicht viel mit meiner Behauptung zu tun.
Ich geh trotzdem mal drauf ein.
"lieber Porky, .. und was wäre, wenn Prof. Streeck garnicht recht hat?"
Ist doch erstmal egal, ob er Recht hat. Ich finds nur gut, dass bei dem Thema auch mal Leute mit unterschiedlichen Ansichten zu Wort kommen lässt. Und er scheint ja auch Ahnung zu haben.
"Allen, die sagen unser Umgang mit "Corona" ist eine Hysterie, muss man enscheiden entgegentreten."
Das ist Ansichtssache. Eine übertrieben Reaktion kann auch schwere Folgen haben, vielleicht auch schwerer als die Krise selbst, was vor allem dramatisch wäre, wenn die Gefahr überschätzt wurde.
Angenommen, nur Großveranstaltungen, wo sich beispielsweise mehr als 20 Leute treffen, werden verboten, dafür hat es auf 50% der Unternehmen, die jetzt schließen müssen oder hohe Nachteile haben, kaum eine Auswirkung, dafür infizieren sich aber ungefähr 10% mehr Leute, dann könnte man schon mal überlegen, ob es das wert ist.
"Wer Herrn Dr Wobargs Thesen noch beklatscht, hat nicht mitbekommen, dass die These von einer Hysterie bei "normaler" alljährlicher Coronaausbreitung sind durch die Sterblichkeitsraten in vielen - auch europäischen Ländern (SPANIEN /ITALIEN / ELSASS...) - schon längst durch die Wirklichkeit widerlegt wurde!"
Das kann zum Teil auch andere Gründe haben, zB anderer Lebensstil, schlechtes Gesundheitssystem. Aber dass man die Sache nicht unterschätzen sollte, zeigt es allemal, da würde ich zustimmen.
"Mir geht es doch selbst auch oft so: wir Menschen glauben gerne an den Wetterbericht, der das schönste Wetter verspricht,"
Damit hat das nichts zu tun. Wenn er sagen würde, er hätte herausgefunden, dass der Virus wochenlang an Oberflächen überleben kann, müsste man das genauso ernst nehmen.
"in diesem Fall lag Herr Wibarg allerdings definitiv komplett daneben."
Das meiste waren ja nur seine Beobachtungen.
"Das Verhalten unserer staatlichen Stellen war und ist daher angemessen und derzeit so absolut notwendig."
Seh ich im Grunde auch so. Lieber ein bisschen Vorsicht ist angemessen.
"Wieviel Menschenleben hätte wohl schon jetzt die Rechthaberei von Dr. Wobarg und Konsorten gekostet? Und wieviel ist uns ein Menschenleben wert. Das sind die einzigen Fragen die zählen."
Diese Diskussion wird aber nie geführt, weil die Leben der besonders gefährdeden wichtiger sind, als die Freiheit der Mehrheit. Soll nicht heißen, dass ich das anders sehe.
"Das die Maßnamen künftig je nach Fortschritt der Evidenzen neu angepasst werden müssen, versteht sich von selbst, und das mit besserer Evidenz auch als unnötig erachtete Maßnamen fallen gelassen werden. Das spricht aber weder gegen das Vorgehen und den Konsens der wissenschaftlichen Experten in unsicheren Zeiten mit geringem gesichtern Wissen noch spricht es gegen die entschiedenen Maßnahmen der von uns gewählten Verantwortlichen, die im übrigen durch unserer hervorragendes föderales System mit regionalen Entscheidungsbefugnissen an die örtlichen Bedingungen angepasst werden kann. Die gesamte Bevölkerung und alle Verantworlichen machen übrigens nach meiner Ansicht ALLE ZUSAMMEN EINEN HERVORRAGENDEN JOB! So bin ich zuversichtlich, das die Krise für uns glimpflich ausgeht."
Seh ich auch so. Finde gut, dass Söder bei uns in Bayern so schnell die Verantwortung übernommen hat.
"Weltweit werden wir aber voraussichtlich mit ein paar Millionen Toten zu rechnen haben, besonders in Entwicklungs und Schwellenländern."
Wahrscheinlich.
"Unser Land wird dann selbstverständlich auch in der Pflicht sein, in der Weltgemeinschaft, diese Ärmsten der Armen zu unterstützen."
Naja, selbstverständlich ist das nicht.
"Der Blick auf Andere wird helfen, uns zu erden und mit unserem Schicksal gelassener und zuversichtlicher Umzugehen, dies wünsche Ich uns allen schon jetzt. Die Krise betrifft uns alle, und sie ist ein weltweites wirtschaftliches Desaster, aber eben auch ein gesundheitliche Katastrophe. Ich bin mir sicher, der Schaden wird minimiert, wenn wir gesellschaftlich zusammen stehen!"
Ich hoff nur, das führt nicht in einen Sozialismus, der die wirtschaftlichen Folgen noch vergrößert.
1
-
1
-
1
-
2:45 Lisp was my first real programming language. I learned most of programming using Game Maker with its own programming language GML. And also RenPy. Around the same time, I was learning Java at school, but it was very basic. I also tried to program games using Java, but didn't get very far.
After school I tried C++ with old OpenGL, but I didn't even know of the stl or libs in general yet.
I was looking into a bunch of languges, and then got stuck with go for a little. I liked it very much at first, but the lack of generics quickly made me lose interest.
And then I stumbled upon Common Lisp. It seemed so minimalistic, and I liked that. (I liked to think about minimalistic langugaes anyway, both programming and spoken languages)
At first I didn't think, it was possible to prograam using this.
I couldn't see if something was a function or a definition or whatever.
So I bought a book, the Land of Lisp. It took me a while to get into it, but soon I thought, I'd never want to use a different language.
I was using it almost exclusively for at least three years, except in university. Whenever I saw shortcomings, I thought they could be fixed using macros or something.
I played around with a few other languages, often lisp inspired. What annoyed me most was that Lisp was so high level, and I couldn't trust the compiler to optimize stuff for me. I just want my stuff efficient by default.
Nowadays I'm mostly using Rust, but there is a Language, which has the real Lisp experience how I would have liked it before. Scopes.
It's basically Lisp, but with more powerful macros to make it more like C++ in some ways (for generic types).
It has a Rust inspired borrow checker.
The low level stuff is lower level than C (there's a distinction between local variables and values).
Syntax is indentation based like python.
And the general feel is a little like Lua (multiple value semantics).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You can try to improve the world, but then it gets worse in a different way.
Maybe a more realistic example:
If you give people money, who are too stupid to earn their own money, they will more likely reproduce, and in a few generations, there are not enough people, who can work, anymore, to feed everyone, and even more people have to die.
But letting them die now, even if we can help them, is not necessarily a good solution as well.
Or you could say, there is a good solution: Preventing poor people, who want to have free money, from getting children.
But if this was really the best solution to that problem, why isn't this done? It probably has bad sites, too.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ich sehe da auch das Risiko von Propaganda, wenn Politik unterrichtet wird. Gibts ja schon bei Geschichte teilweise, dass Lehrer versuchen, ihre Schüler politisch zu prägen...
Eine bessere Möglichkeit scheint mir, dass man möglichst viele Fächer streicht und Anregungen gibt, sich selbst Fortzubilden. Vielleicht soll man dann wöchentlich kommen und erzählen, was man getan hat. Allein das reicht oft schon aus, dass man nicht nur seine Zeit verschwendet, damit man zumindest irgendwas zu erzählen hat. Und vielleicht gibts dann auch Zwischenvorträge zu den Themen, mit denen man sich beschäftigt.
Wär eigentilich wirklich ein überlegenswertes Konzept, oder?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
9:35 I see where this is going. I've been pretty shy, and my mom took a lot of responsibility of things.
I still gave my presents to the other person myself, but she always bought it, most of the time without my involvement.
Sometimes I prepared something myself, but she still gave the inspiration.
Nowadays, when there is a birthday, I don't really care if I have a gift. If I think of it, I tell someone to buy me something. If there's nobody who buys me something, I might buy something myself, but if I'm not forced by someone else or didn't make a clear promise, I won't buy something.
And that doesn't only apply to birthdays. I got most of my friends because my mom invited them. I didn't find friends in Kindergarten by myself. I was just walking around and counting up to 100 until the time was up and I could go home again.
And nowadays, most of the time I hope other people to do stuff. If someone expects something from me, I might do it. But I almost never do anything I'm not really into by myself. It's even difficult for me to do things I want.
But why just me? My brothers are not like this. At least one of them. Not sure about the other one yet.
I assume because I've been shy and my brothers haven't been.
Even if I'm not shy anymore, my parents probably did more things for me because I was.
1
-
1
-
10:00 You COULD write your code in some way that it's easy to change, which would be hard otherwise.
For example if you wrote a game, where some subsystem are 3D (Rendering) and some are 2D (physics, UI), and then you decide to change the dimension of one subsystem (physics), it might be very easy or very difficult, depending on how you wrote it.
In the simplest case you would have to change a 2 to a 3 at one place.
But in the worst case, you have to change ONLY the types, which are related to physics into their 3D equivalents.
In 2D you just used a float to represent rotation, while in 3D it would have to be a quaternion.
You have to rewrite most of the algorithms, since you didn't use algorithms based on dimension generic operations (like the dot product), but instead you used dimension specific operations (like accessing x and y of the vector).
Or if you convert from 3D to 2D, you would probably have used Vectors for rotation speed, which would be scalars in 2D. So you don't immediately know which vectors have to be changed into floats and which would be 2D vectors insdead.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
8:00 That's basically what I do with my projects.
If I see some functionality, that might be useful for other programs as well, or when I need it for another program and don't want to rewrite it, I create a new repo, add this submodule of the existing program into that repo and let the other program use it.
When I find a bug in my new repo or have ideas for improvement, or if I need to extend it to work with one of my programs depending on it, I have to upgrade the repo, but not all programs, which depend on it. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't, most of the time I at least plan to upgrade to a newer version some day.
Especially when using Rust, it's easy to have different programs using different versions of the same library.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Kurz bevor gefragt wurde, woran man ADHS erkennt, hab ich einen Online-Test gemacht, der meint, ich könnte ADHS haben.
Hab ich vermutlich wirklich, wenn ich mal so drüber nachdenke. Die Depressionen hab ich aber schon überwunden, und manchmal kann das auch sehr hilfreich sein, wenn man viele Sachen gleichzeitig machen will, vor allem bei kreativen Tätigkeiten. Wenn ich mal schaffe, meine Gedanken ein bisschen zu strukturieren, dann gelingt es mir manchmal (zumindest für mich) sehr interessante Programme zu schreiben, für die oft Verständnis aus den unterschiedlichen Gebieten notwendig ist.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Some argument I always hear from some bitcoin maximalist:
The block size limit is good, since this way, normal people will be able to run a full node for a few hundred bucks.
This way, even in a few hundred years, the block size will only be a few TB, which is affordable even now.
I guess, that's a valid point.
And satoshi is said to have wanted layers on top of bitcoin. So he would support lightning as well.
I'm not sure about lightning, though. Using it the intended way (running your own nodes and connecting to trusted peers) won't be the default.
I liked, how Nxt (and it's follower Ardor) did it, which has been my favorite CC.
There are a few good things about it:
If you run the default software, you get a normie friendly browser wallet.
In order to create an account, you just have to use a password, which will be used to generate your key. It can be as long as you want, so if you use more than the 25 words like in the monero wallet, it should be safer. It might be a very long sentence, which only makes sense to you and should also be easier to remember because of that.
You also don't have to save any data about your wallet anywhere on your system, just remember the key, which will also be easier to remember anyway.
A few things are not that good, but also not bad:
Proof of stake, some people don't like it because it might be insecure, some prefer it because of less energy waste.
I don't really buy the risk of Proof of Stake. In a PoW currency, you just buy all the hardware, and then can kill the currency. Maybe if china steals all the mining hardware from the people mining in china, this could also happen to bitcoin. All other PoW currencies other than Bitcoin and maybe monero, if the ASIC resistance is done right, can be destroyed easily.
The default client is written in Java, but you could always write a better client in another language, so theoretically not a problem.
The normie friendly browser wallet being the default way to interact with Nxt/Ardor and being enabled by default might also be a bad thing. I prefer GUI and software to be separate. But you could also solve that by writing another client.
But since I understood, that crypto currencies should not have a company behind them, I'm not such a fan of it anymore.
Especially the new smart contracts feature seems bad to me.
It already had specific smart contracts builtin. Basically everything, that ethereum smart contracts are normally used for.
But then they added smart contracts stored as Java bytecode. And that bytecode is bloated.
But there's one really good thing, Ardor has: It even has a smaller block size than Nxt and instead supports multiple chains.
So there's a main chain, which is a bit more expensive, which also stores the balances of the other chains. The other chains can be pruned without security risks.
So the other chains are similar to lightning network, but with the added security of a blockchain system. And as in lightning, your actual funds might be stored regularly on a more secure chain.
1
-
1
-
6:00 Some time ago I was giving a presentation, where I showed some programming project I was working on in my free time at a local game developer meeting. There normally are about 50 to 100 people I guess.
In the hindsight, I think, that was a stupid topic, since I found out, that my program still had a few errors, which are not just bugs, but severe problems which the whole system unusable in general cases, but that's another topic.
I'm pretty introvert, especially in front of foreign people, and the topic was something very specific, nobody really cares about except me, I guess, so it's a bit weird I even had the idea of doing it.
However, I did it. And I think, I couldn't hide, that I was a bit nervous.
I don't think, most people were interested, and I also don't think, the people who were interested, really understood, what I was trying to tell, but afterwards I got positive feedback from some girls, I talked to.
I think, now I know the real reason :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
4:44 When I was 22 I didn't even seriously think about having sex. Wasn't really interested in women at that time.
Probably because I'm most attracted to girls, which are some years younger than me, which would have been a larger problem back then :P
But also because of other interests and some psychical issues.
Nowadays I would like to have sex maybe, but more important, a person who shows real interest in some things I like, like geometric algebra, story structure, and similar. And I guess females are better in that. When I tell girls about such things, they often show more interest than guys.
I guess, that's something natural. If a man is interested in something, has some own goals, women tend to be more interested in him, no matter what it is exactly. Especially, when it is more important than she. But it also might have been coincidences, that girls show so much interest.
1
-
1
-
1
-
15:40 Maybe I'm programming for 5 hours and don't get anything done. And then I get an idea and am 10 hours productive and don't even want to eat. And then I want to sleep, but I just want to finish it, I'm almost done anyway. If I tried to sleep now, I couldn't anyway and would just watch stupid stuff, and still be tired the next day.
And the next day, all my motivation would be gone. Now I have the whole day to finish it, and it's almost finished anyway. I'll first have a long breakfast, then I watch a few episodes of my current anime, then I slowly look into my project and realize I have no idea where to start, so I eat lunch and then go outside. And at 9 in the evening I think, I should just finish it, but since it's not finished yet at midnight and I have work tomorrow, I go to bed and haven't finished it yet. If I just finished it yesterday, it would have taken another 5 hours, but at least it would have been finished.
Something like this isn't considered in this algorithm, right?
1
-
Before I watch the video: I also recognized, that too much branching is rather worse than beneficial.
It should only be done for complex features, which might effect everyones work in a negative way. Like some major rework of an important feature.
I like to let interns work on their own branches, so they don't fear messing up everything, but most of the time, I just merge everything as it is and fix problems later anyway.
Only if it's something very bad, I would not merge it. But the worst thing, that happened so far, were some commits of unintended data, which weren't that bad, so I didn't merge everything, but cherry-picked a few commits.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I like to use an extended version of the structure of Mother 3 instead of the three act structure.
It has an intro and 8 chapters.
My extended version adds four extra chapters, the last three being a thee act structure.
The intro should be clear, a small introduction to the world
The first chapter is still some kind of introduction and setup of the story.
The second and third tell two different stories, which belong together, but show different sides of the same aspect.
At the ending of the third chapter, both chapters are resolved together in some way.
From the fourth chapter onwards, something changed completely.
The fourth chapter introduces these changes while being a setup for chapter 5.
Chapter 5 resolves this setup and prepares chapter 7.
In chapter 6, not much happens, but it's important.
Chapter 7 is the longest chapter. It explores the rest of the world in a more dynamic structure and might be a bit repetitive. It's basically an own structure in itself.
Chapter 8 is something completely different. It does not revisit any established places. And it resolves the story in some way, while leaving a lot of questions.
That's basically the structure of Mother 3 a bit more abstract, so you have more creative freedom.
For example chapter 2 and 3 in Mother 3 are about different characters, which work for opposite sides at the same time. But in a story I wrote using this system, it's about two different concepts explored by the same person.
My first extension adds a ninth chapter, which shows the world after the main conflict is resolved.
My second extension adds three more chapters, which tell a side story.
In chapter 10 something is discovered, which might still lead to problems.
In chapter 11, they try solve the problem, but fail.
In chapter 12, they finally manage to really solve the problem.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I recently started to think, I should start small.
I could write the same story twice, but in the first one, only the health of the hero's mate is threatened, in the second one, the universe will be destroyed forever.
Which of these stories is better?
In the first one, you can at least raise the stakes in a sequel.
In the second one you could lower the stakes in a sequel? Can this be interesting? At least it's something, you don't see very often.
You can think "What's worse than having the whole world destroyed?"
Maybe it's worse, when everything is destroyed but you, but you cannot die.
Or your mate dies. Only everyone you like dies. And if you find new friends, they die shortly afterwards.
Or maybe there just is no real danger anymore. What kinds of stories can you make under this premise?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I will take about two hours, maybe faster, if I'm able to focus, but if I realize, I have to rewrite some component, which I wanted to rewrite anyway, it will last at least one day longer, but if my approach of the rewrite does not work at the first try, it might take even longer, maybe it relies on other components, which need some refactor as well.
And when I'm done, there might be a few bugs, which could take less than a hour to find, but also one or two days, depending on my mental condition and if I my guesses, where the bugs might come from, are right, or if I follow the wrong track for some hours...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
3:15 I also hated this effect when I was younger. But a few years ago, my brother asked, if this might not be a problem, but a tfeature.
In Germany we have some way to counteract this. If one party gets elected by the majority, they won't neccessarily be the one who rules.
Some parties might be able to form a coalition, so when there are two left parties and one right party, and the right party gets around 40% and the left parties get around 30% each, they would form a coalition, which would have 60%, so they would be the rulers.
But we have the 5% hurdle. So if a single party gets less than 5%, it will just be ignored.
So let's say that 20% of the people vote for the same right party, but the remaining people vote for 20 different left parties, these parties will only get 4% on average, which is less than the hurdle. So it might be possible that no or only a few left parties are above that hurdle, and the right party still will be the ruler.
It seems unfair at first. The majority of people already is left. They only fight over minor details. Why should a right party become ruler now?
If I'm left, I just can't get exactly what I want. If I don't vote for one of the major left parties, my vote is just wasted.
But if there is a serious problem, people would be fine with voting for a party, which isn't perfect, as long as they take care of this serious problem.
If there are 20 left parties, left people don't have any major problems. They only fight about minor issues. And most of the left people probably only are left anyway because the mainstream is left.
This way the right minority has a way to regain their power.
(This also works if it's not about left and right of course)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I also installed manjaro at the beginning of this year, and I didn't really like it.
Pamac was not the main problem. I liked to use it.
The problem was, I didn't know, how to upgrade my kernel or how to fix if I deinstall linux, since I didn't install it myself. I'm not sure if that's a Arch thing or a Manjaro thing.
So I switched back to void. XBPS just works well. You don't need a void linux installer to setup void. Just use xbps-install while specifying the root directory. That's even easier than using the installer, especially if you want to do some slightly advanced stuff.
Updates to the kernel come regularly, and old ones don't get deleted until I do it manually, so if the new kernel breaks the system (mostly because of nvidia drivers), I just select an older kernel at boot.
I think, I'm a void maximalist now. Every other distro seems unusable to me. I would even recommend it to beginners. The installer should be good enough, even for beginners.
I might give alpine a chance, though.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
0:28 Real: Not sure if we can just say that. It's always a matter of definition.
But social gender doesn't make sense if it's not related to biological gender.
And even if there is social gender, it's just a term for personality, which is related to gender, so basically gender stereotypes.
0:32 Immutable: Technically that's true for humans, but it's imaginable that biological gender can be changed one day, or added, probably using genetics, maybe also hormones and other things.
0:35 Binary: Both genders are binary. Theoretically you could be male, female, both or nothing, when you only care about reproduction.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I have a similar problem.
I don't even write that often. Maybe once a month or less often. And only a few sentences, maybe up to three per message.
You can't be so busy to not even answer a message once per month, can you?
Maybe she didn't see it, because I don't use her main messaging tool, when I wrote the message, maybe she saw it but was tired and then forgot about it, maybe she misinterpreted something I wrote, since my messages are short and when reading something it's difficult to get the intention (if something is meant to be a joke or something serious), and so gets skeptical about me (probably an unreasonable fear. She knows, how I am in person).
Or maybe she is lying, when she says, she likes our meetings.
I also kind of have the fear, she has some issues with really doing what she wants.
She often does things, she doesn't really want, because she feels obligated to do things, other people seem to expect from her.
So I'm not sure, if she would like to meet more often, if she wasn't so busy, or if she just meets me because she feels obligated to after having a few nice meetings some years ago.
And now she tries to stop our contact without hurting me or getting into a difficult situation herself?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I might also be autistic. At least according to some online test, my social behaviors and my general lifestyle.
But I also hate, when people use their personal problems as an excuse. You can still do everything, even if you are psychically not "normal".
If I know, someone has a problem, I also have problems taking it too serious. If I have a mental problem, when I think, I could never do this or that, I just think about it, and then I might just do it anyway, even if I'm scared. That's how you overcome those kind of problems. Not by saying, you are ill. Even if you have real mental problems, I don't think, using it as an excuse to not do something, you'd like to do, helps anyone.
That's why people, who have some kind of mental problems, often don't like me that much. I might be too direct and not tactful enough in some cases (like an autist :P).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Some problem needs to be addressed when having magic in your world:
If anyone can theoretically learn magic, and magic is powerful, then after a few hundred years it's likely, that some crazy idiot will learn magic and destroy everything.
A society, where everyone has much power, which cannot be controlled well, will most likely destroy itself.
In our world, many people have access to power, for example in a bunch of countries many people have deadly shooting weapons.
But a single person can just kill a bunch of persons, until they are killed themselves, since most people don't want someone to use the power in such a way, and are able to prevent it.
And our super weapons are mostly in the control of a few people, and it's not that easy for some crazy idiot, who doesn't care about the world, to get full access to them, so it's not that likely to happen.
But in a world, who anyone could get powers much stronger than pistols, maybe even at the level of nuclear bombs, it's likely they will just destroy themselves.
So defense magic might be the only way not to die. So if there is a powerful magic system, the defense would most likely have to be stronger than the attack.
Or alternatively it could be very complicated to use powerful magic.
If only very intelligent people, who are happy with their life and normally don't want the world to be destroyed, are able to learn the powerful types of magic, they probably won't destroy the world.
If you spent many years of your life to get good at magic, would you really want to destroy everything?
Or would you rather want to help your people, rule the world or have "fun" using your powers in a sustainable way?
Remember, even if you plan to destroy the world in the long run, there will be other macicans, who will probably kill you before.
So it wouldn't be a good idea to start doing evil things in the world and be discovered shortly afterwards.
1
-
1
-
You could destroy the world, and when you want to add more content, it's prequels.
Maybe there are multiple character arcs, which are told one after another, and either stop, when the character dies or when the world is destroyed.
So in the first character arc, the character just has a happy end, gets old and dies.
In the second, the character dies unexpectedly.
In the third one, the world is destroyed.
And after that, you know, that the world will be destroyed after a certain time.
Except something weird happens and the world is not destroyed at the same time in the arc of another character.
Similar to that weird comic movie, where all women are naked and have big breasts and a big green ball tells stories about how it destroyed the world to a victim, and in the last story it tells, the green ball is destroyed and after it recognizes that, it's also destroyed in the present...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mich nervt an der CSU, dass sie sich immer so entschlossen gegen eine Zusammenarbeit mit der AfD aussprechen, aber mit keiner anderen Partei, vor allem, da sie mehr gemeinsam haben als mit manch anderen.
Und selbst wenn es die einzige ist, sollten sie klarer rüberbringen, warum das die einzigen sind.
Klar gibt es viel zu kritisieren an der AfD, aber dadruch, dass viele überhaupt keine Zusammenarbeit in Betracht ziehen, selbst wenn es ihren eigenen Zielen nutzt, macht für mich die anderen Parteien schon weniger unglaubwürdig.
Sagen sie das nur so explizit, um sich von der AfD abzugrenzen und mehr Stimmen von Leuten, die "gegen rechts" sind zu bekommen?
Ich glaube, solche Ausgrenzungen machen die AfD eher stärker, richten den Fokus nur auf die AfD, statt irgendetwas gutes für die entsprechende Partei selbst zu bewirken.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Ich finde BGE nicht so gut, aber auf jedenfall besser als Hartz IV, das fast das gleiche ist, nur dass es bei Arbeit plötzlich wegfällt. und die ganzen Pflichtversicherungen. Und ein einfacheres Steuersystem ist auch lange überfällig. Nur Mehrwertsteuer ist auch sinnvoller, als besteuerte Arbeit. 50% ist ein bisschen viel, aber immer noch um einiges weniger als jetzt. Ich fände weniger Grundeinkommen wohl angemessener. Außerdem sollte der Betrag nicht fest sein, sondern gleich die 2% Inflation miteinberechnen.
Dass es für Kinder genau halb so viel ist, kommt mir seltsam vor. Ab wann verdoppelt es sich dann? Gibt es keine Abstufung?
Kann man nicht einfach eine Mathematische Formel machen, zB BGE=sqrt(Alter/Durchschnittsalter)*Gesamtsteuereinnahmen*(Steueranteil für BGE)
Nach einer Formel die von den Gesamtsteuereinnahmen abhängig ist, stellt sich die Finanzierungsfrage überhaupt nicht, und die Höhe wird dynamisch angepasst.
Das Problem ist halt auch, egal wie hoch das BGE ist, die Preise sich dementsprechend anpassen würden, vor allem, wenn dadurch weniger gearbeitet wird, und arme auch nicht so viel besser dran sind.
Der Neid in der Gesellschaft ist wohl kein großes Problem, je nachdem welchen Anteil der Steuern für das BGE ausgegeben wird. Gibt ja eh schon Hartz IV. Und man gibt doch lieber an faule Mitmenschen Geld, als an betrügerische Firmen-/Bankenchefs, oder?
Also den Hauptvorteil sehe ich darin, dass es einfacher ist, vor allem Bürokratie, und dass man selbst mehr Freiheit hat über sein Geld, wie man sich versichert etc.
Dass Leute bevor- oder benachteiligt werden, kann man nicht ändern. Bei uns bekommt man Riesenschnitzel, die kein normaler Mensch ohne Probleme auf einmal essen kann, für knapp über 5€, da ist ein Mindestlohn von über 8€ und ein BGE von 1000€ doch viel zu viel, oder?
Man könnte es ja auch regional abhängig machen. Ein teil des BGE wird aus den Durschschnitts-Steuereinnahmen des Dorfes, ein Teil aus denen des Landkreises, ein Teil aus denen des Bundeslandes etc. berechnet sodass in reichen Regionen alle davon profitieren, und in armen Regionen nicht alle einfach mehr Geld bekommen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
10:00 I never heard, you have to sleep 8 hours.
I never had a clear number in mind, but I always thought, it's around 10 hours for children, which decreases down to around 7 hours for adults, maybe even less when having a healthy lifestyle.
And the chirstain monks also had a similar rule: 7 hours for work, 7 hours for god, 7 hours for sleep.
When I can't sleep I always think "I want to have at least 7 hours of sleep", so I wouldn't be tired the next day.
For example when my work starts at 9, I probably want to get up somewhere around 8, so I try to go to be asleep at 1 in the night at latest.
But a few years ago, this logic made it feel weird to me to go to bed way before midnight. So going to bed at 10 always felt too early.
And even if I was able to fall asleep around 1, I often got up between 6 and 7 anyway, and was tired the next day.
But now I even try to go to bed around 8. Usually it I actually go to bed a little later, 9 or 10, but I still plan to have 8 or more hours of sleep if possible.
I never get as much sleep as I plan. I wake up in the middle of the night or don't fall asleep as soon, or wake up earlier.
So planning in 8 hours is pretty reasonable.
I actually want to be able to have around 9 hours of sleep.
The plan is to sleep early, wake up in the middle of the night after around 3 hours of sleep stay awake at least 3 hours, then sleep another 2 or 3 hours.
Because you usually only get one phase of deep sleep during one sleep, I think. And this phase usually starts during the first hour and lasts between 1 or 2 hours.
And this is the most important sleep. And if I stay awake for at least 3 hours, the chance is pretty high, that I get another deep sleep when I fall asleep next time.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
How can this be applied to gamedev?
Most things can't be independently deployable. Especially things, you would put into a library, like a physics or render engine, or more important your math stuff.
But you could put the rendering and the physics of a specific game into different microservices for example. Not sure, if that counts. But both could be independantly deployable.
You could test the game rendering by sending the game state to it, where which object moves and how they change, which objects get destroyed or created, if a new scene is loaded, etc.
You could even use it for different games, which use different physics or no physics at all, as long as the rendered objects stay the same.
Or you could test the game physics by using a very minimalistic renderer, or just outputting the expected positions. You could run the game with many different renderers, maybe some minimalistic 2D one or some realistic 3D one, or some surreal style.
That's basically how I tried to make some game I made less coupled.
But I'm not really happy with it. They use the same base code, some shared structs which are used by both services. But both services include most of the same structs, only cleaned up. For example balls in the renderer don't contain the speed, and balls in the physics don't contain the color. So it's kind of code duplication.
I created a library for both "services", so I still have to add some code to really make it run. I basically just have to define how the communication works.
I can use both libraries and just move data around inside the application to create a standalone.
Or I use only one of these libraries to write to and read from a tcp stream and create a client and server this way.
I like the basic design, but I'm not happy with the specifics.
What I also can think of is packing menus and the real game or each different part of the game into a single application, and then add a meta application, which just selects the next application.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I work at a small company, around 5 paid workers and around 5 interns most of the time.
Since 2020 we work remote most of the time.
And since then, half of the interns we get don't even live close.
We have a group calls running all the time.
Even if we go to office once in a while (around once per week currently, only the boss, me and one other paid worker), we can't turn off the call, since not everybody can just come to office.
And coming to office makes communication with people even more difficult, since only one person per room can join the call, else we get echo effects.
And with the continuously running group call it's almost as if we were in office.
If you need something, just ask somebody directly. No need to wait for meetings or write a mail or something.
If I want to tallk to a single person, I can just enter another call with just this person.
This also makes work with interns pretty comfortable. They can just ask if they have a problem, and they can share screen.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I almost always use terminal, when I don't have to use something different. I like text files and never use office programs (I rather convert Word documents to PDF or Markdown using pandoc on the command line).
But I never use vim. I avoid vim, where I can, even if I found out, how to exit vim again. I always set my default editor to nano, or recently micro, which is a very convenient text editor in terminal.
So your arguments don't apply to me and are probably very opinionated and wrong.
Vim has pretty weird commands.
For example, in order to edit something in vim, you first have to enter the edit mode. But normally, when you use an editor, you want to edit something. And even if it's just one or two keys to enter the edit mode, I don't see any reason, why it isn't the default mode.
Besides the controls don't really work well with my keyboard config.
And for text editing, I prefer gedit, which has almost no features, just a simple editor, because I want to be able to open multiple files at once from one terminal without the editor preventing me from using the terminal, like terminal editors like vim, nano and micro would.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Also ich fand Laschet hat gut reagiert.
Die anderen beiden reden Blödsinn, Laschet lässt sie ausreden und lacht währenddessen, was zeigt, dass ihm bewusst ist, dass das Blödsinn ist.
Wenn er an der Reihe ist, zeigt er auf, was genau an dem Blödsinn falsch ist, und warum es so gemacht wurde. Genau das will ich von einem Politiker hören: Warum Dinge auf eine bestimmte Art gemacht werden, oder warum man Dinge anders machen sollte.
Und da ihm keiner Widersprochen hat, ist er doch eindeutig der Gewinner der Debatte. Ich kann mir nicht erklären, wieso das irgendjemand anders sieht.
1
-
My current main character is also a CMHB.
Most of the time she does not need her badass powers, but just has a relaxing life.
If the situation requires it, she can be as badass as she needs to be. She just unpacks her "ultra instinct" and so basically wins every fight.
I don't think, I'd ever let her lose.
And it's also not that surprising.
She just has her powers, she probably learnt them a few centuries ago, and she knows about her powers, she does not have amnesia. She just does not often think about it.
She does not feel the need to tell anyone about it. Other people only recognize her powers, when they cause a situation, where she needs them.
And some of them are really impressed or afraid afterwards.
Just like when I do my regular programming job, and then I face a problem wher I need some complicated math, I might just use my not really secret math power to solve it, without telling anyone about it. Often noone knows, what I really did, just that it works. And when they see, what I did, when they know a bit more about my work, they might be impressed (but probably not afraid, at least not yet).
Sounds like I can't write characters with a different personality than me :P
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1:38:50 Wenn alle sparen würden, gäbe es weniger zu kaufen, und so wird auch das Geld weniger wert, da es ja pro Einheit Geld weniger Waren gibt.
Also sobald das Geld anfängt, weniger wert zu werden, lohnt es sich nicht mehr zu sparen.
Also wäre das Geld weder deflationär noch inflationär, sondern würde sich eher auf einem stabilen Wert einpendeln.
Wobei, wenn der Wert des Geldes nur gleich bleibt, und nicht steigt, lohnt es sich auch nicht wirklich, zu sparen. Was bringt es mir, Geld im Wert von einer Million zu sparen, wenn es in zehn Jahren immer noch eine Million wert ist?
Stattdessen werde ich es entweder gewinnbringend anlegen, was dazu führt, dass auch Geld an sich mehr wert wirt, da gewinnbringende Investitionen auch dazu führen, dass es mehr Waren gibt.
Alternativ kann ich auch einfach konsumieren, wenn mein Geld weniger wert wird.
Dann gibt es weniger Waren, was die Inflation verstärkt.
Wenn nun jeder einfach konsumiert, führt das zu Hyperinflation. Aber da wir ein inflationäres Geld haben, bei dem auch keine Hyperinflation entsteht, warum sollte es bei einem stabilen Geld passieren? Wird also nicht passieren. Stattdessen gibt es wieder einen Anreiz, sein Geld sinnvoll anzulegen, was dazu führt, dass mehr produziert wird, und der Wohlstand steigt, und die Preise sinken, also das Geld wieder mehr wert wird.
Also vereinfacht gesagt wird sich der Geldwert irgendwo einpendeln, wahrscheinlich bei einer leichten Deflation, ich würde mal ca. 5% schätzen.
Warum kommt keiner von beiden auf diesen einfachen Punkt?
Das hab ich mir nur durch fundamentale Grundkenntnisse (Angebot und Nachfrage) und Logik hergeleitet.
Oder mache ich da einen Denkfehler?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
My score in this test is 24 only. I'm not autistic anymore :(
In other tests, I was slightly autistic, probably asperger.
I probably answered too many questions about social activities with answers, that say, I like them.
But I guess, if I would have regular social contacts, I would answer them differently.
Besides of the people I almost see daily anyway, I don't meet anyone. Only once every few months.
I think, I would want to meet other people about once a week, if I really like them maybe more often, but I want a few hours for myself every day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@zeropolicy7456 No problem. I also tend to write pretty long posts sometimes :)
And I totally agree. I especially like that you take evolution into account. Most people just seem to have no idea what evolution practically means.
I think, that's also the reason why most important discoveries are done by men.
Even if having a companion might help to stay motivated, not having a companion might be a motivation to create something great, so people will pay attention to me.
That's probably doesn't really help for finding a woman as a man. Having some goal is probably enough.
Women don't have to be successful to find a man. If they look only slightly good, they have almost free choice.
I'm also pretty good to stay motivated for some time without a companion if I think it's worth it. But if I work on some project for months, some program I think to be useful, and then I post it somewhere, it can be pretty frustrating if not a single person really cares.
My current hobby, writing short continuation stories and posting them, works better. Even if there's not a lot of feedback, I know that most of my stories are read by multiple persons.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@christianl1527 Das Beispiel vom Rauchen ist nicht so gut gewählt. Da ist offensichtlich, dass rauchen nicht gesund ist, da braucht man nicht viel Hintergrundwissen, um sich das vorstellen zu können.
Dazu kommt, dass Rauchen auch positive Auswirkungen haben kann, zumindest psychisch.
Auch seltsam, wenn ich im Internet nach Statistiken zum Zusammenhang von CO2 und Temeratur schaue, dann kommen nur lauter Artikel von Kritikern am Klimawandel. Soll nicht heißen, dass die relevanter sind. Liegt bestimmt daran, dass Leute, die dem Mainstream gegenüer negativ eingestellt sind, häufiger recherchieren, und dann solche Ergebnisse bevorzugen, und dass Leute, die den Wisssenschaftlern glauben, nicht recherchieren.
Ich seh schon, ich muss mich doch mal mehr zum Thema durchlesen, auch wenns mich eigentlich gar nicht interessiert.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I can relate to this guy.
I don't have many friends, and when I talk to people online, they also often stop anwering me, if they answer at all.
But not because I'm too boring, but probably because I'm too interesting, or rather too special.
Most people are normal and often boring, and they are not interested in more specific topics like math, politics, programming, languages, or whatever.
Maybe I'm kind of boring about these less interesting topics. No idea how to smalltalk properly, etc.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The title already sounds interesting. I also felt some kind of existential dread since I'm somewhere between 5 and 10.
The first time when seeing the stars in the background of Zelda 3 on the mountain.
I thought things like „What if the world didn't exist? Why does anything exist at all?“ and since then had many sleepless nights.
Questions like that scared me so much, I almost felt like I left my own and wanted this all to be a dream, but I knew it wasn't and even if it was a dream, it was a fact about reality I could not deny.
And shortly after that moment, I was exhausted and I just felt nothing about it for some time. I often didn't even know, what the problem was, after the feeling was gone.
I didn't have it often. Only every few months mostly. Sometimes I thought, it's gone, but it just came back a few months later when thinking about questions like this.
I never tried to avoid to think about such stuff, when it was in my mind. I never suppress any feelings and just lock them away, if I have a choice.
It's just a problem, and I had to find a solution.
But now I really think, I'm over it. I didn't have it for some years already, I guess. And the last few times, I had it, wasn't as bad. I started to like this fear. Like a weird fetish.
I think, my rational site has taken control over me (I turned from INFP to INTP), maybe also to protect me from thoughts like this?
Rationally there is no real problem. It's purely emotional, so why even care?
No idea, if the video is even about this topic :P
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@voskresenie- I don't remember most of this conversation.
When you include zero in your natural numebers, which often makes sense, 0 is the first number.
Starting to count from 0 doesn't really make sense.
If you count, it's like jumping over the elements.
You start at zero, but you don't say it.
I would only make ordinal numbers start from zero, not cardinal, just like it already is in most programming languages.
So I start at 0, this is my "first" (0st) element.
Then I move to place one, there still is an element, so it's element 1. Then I go to place two, and if there still is something, it's 2. And I repeat this until there is no element anymore. The resulting number is the count.
The first index with doesn't have an element.
That's one way to view it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
6:28 I would probably be a good teacher. If an intern doesn't know how to do something, I don't offer the "right way", but tell them a few options I have in mind, which could work, and also often ask, if they have a better idea.
Or if I look at code other people wrote, I often say, what they could have done better and why I think, this is better that way, but as long as it works and I don't have to work with it, I don't force anything.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Die Erklärung von David Robert Grimes ergibt auch nicht viel Sinn. Die Methoden sind eben viel Subtiler. Die Wissenschaftler sind nicht in die Verschwörung eingeweiht. Die Wissenschaftler vertreten nur ihre Ansichten. Nur ist es eben so, dass die Wissenschaftler, die eine Ansicht haben, die gewissen mächtigen Institutionen wie Staaten nützlich sind, beispielsweise häufiger finanziert werden, besser von den Medien dargestellt werden, etc.
Dadurch ist es aus rein finanzieller Sicht für Wissenschaftler sinnvoll, sich bei diesen Themen eher an die Mainstreammeinung zu halten oder zu schweigen, statt vehement eine Gegenmeinung zu vertreten. Zudem gibt es dort auch Gruppenzwang. Sobald ein namenhafter Wissenschaftler eine Ansicht vertritt, dann werden insbesondere schlechte Wissenschaftler an diesem Ruhm teilhaben wollen, und weitere Arbeiten veröffentlichen, welche die These bestätigen. Dadurch bildet sich ein Konsens, der erstmal nicht so leicht zu durchbrechen ist, wenn es nicht eindeutig zu widerlegen ist. Und bei vielen Themen lässt sich nunmal nicht eindeutig sagen, was die Wahrheit ist, und dann hält sich eben auch die Mehrheitsmeinung.
Diese Gruppen von Wissenschaftlern, die eine bestimmte Ansicht vertreten, die sich durchgesetzt hat, stellen dann widerum auch eher Leute ein, die diese Theorien akzeptieren. An dem Punkt ist es schon gar nicht mehr nötig, dass es auf oberer Ebene eine Verschwörung gibt, da es ein selbststabilisierendes System ist.
Theoretisch ist es auch nicht notwendig, dass es eine Verschwörung gibt, damit sich solche Zustände etablieren.
Wenn man sich dessen jedoch im klaren ist, würde es einem aber nicht wundern, dass diese Systematik von jemandem ausgenutzt wird, um seine Interessen durchzusetzen. Und dadurch, dass es möglich ist, ist es auch sehr wahrscheinlich, dass es bereits passiert ist.
Ob es jetzt bei diesem Thema auch der Fall ist, ist eine andere Frage. Aber zumindest, ob der Mainstream, der sich etabliert hat, auch der Wahrheit entspricht, ist fraglich.
Wenn man nur ein bisschen Ahnung davon hat, wie sich Menschen verhalten, und das mal logisch durchdenkt, müsste eigentlich jeder zur selben Ansicht kommen.
Hat jemand etwas dagegen einzuwenden?
Die einzigen angreifbaren Punkte sind die Annahmen, die ich über Menschen treffe, oder womöglich falsche Schlussfolgerungen.
1
-
@Uhlinator1 Ja, Aufmerksamkeit schon, aber nicht Ansehen unter anderen etablierten Wissenschaftlern.
Und dass Einzelpersonen eine andere Ansicht vertreten, bringt vielleicht der Person mehr Aufmerksamkeit, aber auch nur, weil das mal was anderes ist.
Solange es nur wenige Leute sind, die eine andere Ansicht vertreten, wird es vermutlich Leute geben, die diese finanziell unterstützen werden. Die Quelle des Geldes liegt aber für Gewöhnlich bei den Vertretern der etablierten Ansichten, weshalb es aus finanzieller Sicht intelligenter ist, bei diesen einen guten Eindruck zu hinterlassen.
1
-
1
-
@Uhlinator1 Sie forschen ja in eine "objektive" Richtung, bzw. deren Argumente und Theorien sind nachvollziehbar und valide.
Vielleicht mal ein Beispiel im Zusammenhang mit Klima:
Du bist Vorsitzender eines Technologieunternehmens, und fängst an, Widnräder bauen zu lassen. Die Leute sind aber zufrieden mit Kohleenergie, also musst du sie irgendwie dazu bringen, auf Windenergie umzuschwenken. Jetzt hörst du von kleinen Gruppen an Wissenschaftlern, die Forschungen darüber anstellt, wie gefährlich CO2 für die Atmosphäre ist.
Sie direkt zu finanzieren und ein bestimmtes Ergebnis zu erwarten, wäre aber zu offensichtlich und könnte zu schlechter Berichterstattung führen.
Daher spendest du an die Institute/Universitäten, an denen diese Wissenschaftler forschen. Das führt nebenbei dazu, dass man als großzügig wahrgenommen wird.
Wenn die Ergebnisse in die richtige Richtung verlaufen, dann spendest du mehr, wenn es in die falsche Richtung geht, spendest du weniger oder nicht mehr.
Am besten erhöhst du die Spenden nicht direkt nach einem Ergebnis, sondern mit etwas Verzögerung, damit es nicht so offensichtlich ist.
Und so ändern sich langsam aber stetig die etablierten Forschungsergebnisse in die gewünschte Richtung, und das auch ganz ohne Betrug, nur dadurch, dass die Wissenschaftler, die eine für dich vorteilhafte, und auch nachvollziehbare Ansicht vertreten, mehr zu Wort kommen und stärker repräentiert sind, obwohl es sich um ein kontroverses Thema handeln müsste.
Natürlich muss das in diesem Fall nicht zutreffen, aber ich schätze, auf diese Art ist es möglich, auf eine subtile Art den wissenschaftlichen Konsens in seine Richtung zu lenken.
1
-
3:30 Yeah, I'm annoyed by the staggered layout. It's very difficult to find non-staggered keyboards.
4:35 I think letters make sense for writing. And as an addition I use simple autocomplete, which only includes words in currently opened files, so it works with every language and for different tasks.
6:05 Vim motions don't work for me. I switched to the Neo keyboard layout. And vim motions are one of these stupid controls where the keys are specified by position (similar to WASD for gaming), but they still are defined layoud dependent, so if you use a different keyboard layout, they neither have a memorable position, nor a memorable letter. Also I already have the most important shortcuts because I use the Neo layout. I have the arrow keys, page up/down, space, backspace, enter, etc. all on my letter keys when pressing some modifier key. So not sure why I would need specific vim keys to replace the arrow keys...
9:30 The main reason why I prefer keyboards with inbuilt touchpads is that I can almost write while typing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
3:50 Yeah, if you have to use unwrap, you probably did something wrong.
In most cases, you can get the values using if-let.
If you expect something to fail, avoid using unwrap, but either forward the error to the next function or generate some error message for the user, if possible one which doesn't kill the program.
If you know, it won't fail, then unwrap is acceptable, but I'd still use except, just to be sure, or use unwrap_unsafe, if you're really sure.
1
-
1
-
@MetraMan09 No, it's just basic quantum physics.
Imagine you do the double slit experiment, and the electron either moves through the left slit (|Left⟩) or through the right slit (|Right⟩).
So now it's in a superposition of left and right (√2(|Left⟩ + |Right⟩)).
So there are basically two parallel worlds now, we can see. One where the electron went left and one where it went right.
They both start to exist when the electron has to decide, which slit to take. So at the same time.
And when you measure the electron after it turns into a superposition, you and the world get entangled with the state of the electron you measure, with both of the worlds, on of them being the world you recognize, which would be the point in time, when you measure the electron in both worlds, so the same time.
Or is there a good reason, why this should be different?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I don't fully agree.
I'm not likely to get addicted to video games anymore. As a child I kind of was, I often preferred video games over social contacts, and was looking forward to playing video games again, when coming home from school.
But nowadays it's different. I know, I'd like to play a good video game, but most games aren't good enough, and it's a bit exhausting to start new games.
Even if I know, I have some game I like, and would like to continue, I often don't, because I have better things to do.
The thing, that's most likely to stop me from having social contacts are creative ideas. When I have some idea, I can get really motivated, and need to write it down, maybe write a program, and I want to finish it, before I lose motivation. And in such a phase, I try to avoid everything else, which might stop my progress, not just eating and porn, also social contacts often take away a lot of time.
While playing games, I also can't eat, like I often do in an unhealthy way while watching Youtube.
Games can also be a good motivation for standing up early instead of staying in bed for another hour and watching porn.
I think, it kind of depends on the game and on you. If you play it, just because it is fun, because it tells some nice story or you learn something from it, and not because of addiction, it should be fine.
If it stops you from eating too much, while watching Youtube, it's also not that bad. So it also is important, what you do else.
1
-
I also often think, it's difficult to talk about normal topics.
And when talking about „normal“ topics, I often have a different opinion.
Basically I'm only good at talking about programming stuff (linux, hardware, programming languages), science (math, physics), media (videogames, movies), politics, maybe some spiritual stuff, but I'm not sure, what „normal“ people talk about.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TheMercury79
Not sure, where she is lying. Most of what she says, seems sounds reasonable.
They tried to avoid massive restriction of rights, but weren't able to save some of the older people in some regions. She recognzies the problem and is trying to find solutions.
"The swedish leaders need emotional manipulation because they have no emotions"
What's wrong with you?
Personal emotions are not a good indicator for decisions.
If you wanted to, you probably could create similar emotions for other problems, like everytime the flu is around, but that time, noone cared, or even the people, which get depressions and partially kill themselves when having to stay at home.
The initial fear, people had, was the healthcare system being overloaded, and that was the only thing, they tried to stop with lockdowns, since almost everyone will be infected at some point anyway.
They managed not to overload the healthcare system without massive restrictions, so more people have been infected already and the risk to get infected there now is lower. At least when this theory was correct.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hannessteffenhagen61 Unity doesn't seem like it's aimed at professionals. The benefit is, you can also get something done yourself, if you don't know that much about the project.
And even in Engines, you still need a lot of programming for the actual game logic.
You just don't need to know how to do some basic things like math, physics, rendering, audio, asset loading.
But when not using engines, you also just need to use some libraries, which already exist. You just have to decide for some, and maybe they don't work together well because the physics lib uses different vector types than the rendering lib, but getting something almost as good as an engine shouldn't be too difficult.
1
-
1
-
7:50 What I hate most about inheritance is being able to override things multiple times.
Something should either be abstract or maybe virtual with a default implementation, and you only override it once.
Else something like this could happen.
There's a class A. Class B inherits class A, since it's basically the same, but almost everything is slightly different.
Class C inherits from class B, since it's basically the same, but almost everything is slightly different.
Why not just let class C already inherit from class A and duplicate the one method from class B, which is still the same?
Or even better, turn this method into a function.
Maybe just create an abstract super class for A, B and C, all three of them, and only make the parts, which are not exactly the same abstract methods?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Im "Tao te king" gibt es doch einige Absätze zu Herrschaft. Dabei geht es darum, dass ein weißer Herrscher so regiert, dass niemand merkt, dass es einen Herrscher gibt.
Anarchismus bedeutet nicht zwingend, dass es keine Gesetze gibt. Wenn man Libertarismus als eine Form des Anarchsimus zählt, dann stimmt das alles nicht, was du da erzählst.
Warum sollte man in der Anarchie nichts besitzen dürfen? Es gibt doch keine Herrschaft, die das verbieten kann.
Die schwarzen Blöcke sind doch keine Anarchisten. Sind das keine reichen Kinder, die nicht arbeiten wollen, und ein paar Krawallmacher, um irgendwelche politischen Entscheidungen durchsetzen zu können.
Ich sehe das am ehesten so, dass Anarchismus der Standard ist und eine Herrschaftsform vor allem die Interessen derjenigen durchzusetzen versucht, die sowieso schon Macht haben, und durch Demokratie und teils auch sinnvolle Projekte, die auf andere Arten viel besser durchgeführt werden könnten, versucht, vertrauen bei der dummen Bevölkerung zu gewinnen, um so der möglichen Konkurrenz Schwierigkeiten zu bereiten.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I found a way to circumvent this problem:
In my current fantasy world, men don't exist.
There might be a bunch of men, but it's very common to be a girl.
And I somehow didn't fall into one of these archetypes, I guess.
There's one like a mother/mentor, so this is kind of archetypic.
But the other ones I can't tell in a few words.
One travels a lot, and is not at home most of the time, kind of conservative, etc.
One is pretty strong, mostly because of technical knowledge, but also likes to relax a lot, is a bit chubby and does not like to go outside often except for training about once a day.
I guess, they don't even fall into typical male archetypes...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Wie kann man aus dem gezeigten Plakat gleich auf Ausländerfeindlichkeit und Religionsfeindlichkeit kommen? Sie wollen die Scharia nicht, welche ja nicht mit unserem Grundgesetz übereinstimmt. Dass man Ausländer zurückschickt, vor allem, wenn sie Straffällig sind, zurückschickt, hört sich im Grunde auch nicht schlecht an.
Bei der PDV bin ich mir nicht ganz sicher. Das Programm klingt jedenfalls sinnvoll. Solange es nicht radikaler ausgeführt werden würde, ist das sinnvoll. Aber solange sie noch keine Mehrheit haben, sollte es kein Problem sein, sie zu wählen.
Das mit der Nähe zu Rechten und Verschwörungstheorien kann man eh oft nicht ernst nehmen. Das wird doch über jeden erzählt, dessen Ansichten zu stark vom Mainstream abweichen.
Die Partei würde ich nicht wählen. Das meiste was die machen ist ziemlich blöd, wenn auch manchmal lustig. Aber vielleicht nicht mehr, wenn es ernst wird.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I can totally relate to that. I also always try to build mansions instead of a simple shack.
I also think, I'm capable of it, but maybe I should build a few more shacks first.
I'm a game developer, in private, I try to do almost everything myself. I don't use engines, I use a few libraries, but nothing too specific. I use my own math and physics, I use a pretty basic rendering library, not even that basic, but at least no engines, where everything is designed to work together. So I have to find out many things myself, and sometimes also have a look at how other people do it.
I'm pretty perfectionist about it. I'm often stuck because I want to do it the right way.
Sometimes I do it in some way and then I recognize it doesn't work as expected, and I'm stuck again.
But I already created some components, which can be reused and are probably superior to the stuff most people use.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1:01:10 Die 5%-Hürde ist eine gute Sache.
Ich fand das vor einer Weile auch immer problematisch: Angenommen es gibt 20 linke Parteien, und 80% der Wähler sind links, 20% sind rechts. Wenn jetzt alle linken die Parteien ungefähr gleichmäßig wählen, dann kommt keine linke Partei über die 5%-Hürde (wäre 4% für jede). Und wenn dann alle Rechten dieselbe rechte Partei wählen, dann kommt trotzdem eine rechte Partei an die Macht. Und das klingt erstmal schlecht, weil dadurch die Mehrheitsmeinung ignoriert wird.
Aber andererseits hat so eine unterdrückte Mindreheit auch die Chance, etwas ganz andres zu machen.
Wenn die eine Gruppe bereits an der Macht ist, dann können sie sich leisten, über irgendwelche Details zu streiten.
Egal welche Volkspartei man wählt, es macht keinen großen Unterschied. Alle teilen sich dasselbe grundlegende Weltbild. Nur die AfD geht bei vielem nicht mit.
Wenn jetzt also die Linke und die FDP und die CSU nacheinander unter die 5%-Hürde fallen, dann gibt das der AfD umso mehr chancen.
Aber die AfD ist nur eine Sammelbewegung von unterschiendlichen Mainstreamkritischen Bewegungen, insbesondere altlinke, libertäre, konservative, und bestimmt auch richtige Rechtsextreme.
Viele würden bestimmt lieber die LKR, die PDV, die NPD, die Basis oder ähnliches wählen. Aber das kann man sich in der aktuellen Situation nicht leisten, wenn man gegen den Mainstream gewinnen will, und die Ansichten der AfD eher für eine akzeptable Grundlage hält.
Über die Details kann man verhandeln, wenn man bereits am gewinnen ist. Also wenn die AfD 30% oder 40% hat, kann man vielleicht mal anfangen, die Kleinparteien zu wählen, um so eine neue Parteienlandschaft aufzubauen, um so die Details zu verhandeln, was womöglich auch nötig sein wird, um eine übermäßige Dominanz einer Partei zu verhindern, für den Fall, dass die AfD wirklich so viel besser macht.
Die derzeitigen Mainstream-Parteine werden sich entweder anpassen und zu irgendwelchen Kleinparteine werden, verschwinden, oder vielleicht wird eine sogar die neue Anti-Mainstream-Partei ähnlich der AfD jetzt.
Aber jetzt nicht zu wählen, oder Kleinparteien, hat nicht viel Sinn, wenn man mit dem aktuellen Kurs nicht zufrienden ist, zumindest wenn man mit der AfD zumindest irgendwas anfangen kann.
1
-
1
-
1
-
8:30 Rust is my main programming language for maybe 8 years. Whenever I start a new project, it's usually in Rust. Maybe 12 years ago, I got into Common Lisp, stuck with it for maybe 3 years, then tried a few other languages, and then stuck with Rust more or less.
After I got into Rust, I used Scopes for a while , which I still think is the most powerful system/graphics programming langugae. And I also wrote some lib in C because I wasn't sure if I will stick with Scopes or Rust.
And for work we use Unity, so I can't use Rust. But even at work, I use Rust for small scripts or side projects, whenever possible.
And now I maintain more than 60 projects I wrote in rust more or less actively. The main reason for such a high number is that I try to put common functionality into separate crates, so I can share it between different programs (like my collision library already has four crates: the general collision trait, the simulaiton, and two crates with an implementation for a different shape each).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm kind of the leader in my team, since I'm the only employed programmer, and everyone else is an intern. I normally let them do, what they want. When I see, they are doing something stupid, I'll tell them, how I would do it, or how they could improve the code. If they don't fix it, I'll probably fix it myself some time later, at least when I have to work with the code.
It doesn't make too much sense to force a programming style onto them, when they will just stay for a few months. It will just slow them down.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Sounds like a new C would actually be useful.
I would call it T, and it has different syntax than C, similar primitive types as Rust (common number types, arrays, tuples and fat pointer slices).
No compile time execution, no generics. One directional type inference (let x = ..., typeof x would be obvious from the argument result).
Also fixed call order if the calls have side effects, and probably immutable by default.
Maybe also a simpler pointer logic. I hate auto deref ONLY when using the dot operator. But the -> operator is also annoying.
So I'd either use the Scopes reference logic for pointers (if a is a pointer, a.b is a pointer, if a is a valuae, a.b is a value) or the Penne reference logic (if a is a pointer, it will just be used as if it wasn't a pointer. You have to do &a or &&a if it should stay a pointer; same for a.b).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The story I want to write, also will be based on internal motivations, not on external ones.
But that's difficult.
I don't want to have these motivations:
* "my situation turned bad, I want do restore it" (girlfriend abducted; village destroyed; lost job)
* "my situation was bad all along, I want to improve it" (living in a dystopia; being lonely)
* "my situation is fine, but it will be bad, if I don't act" ("they will find me"; the government starts to take freedoms away, but noone does anything against it)
* "my situation is fine, but it can get better" (founding a band, finding the lost father)
I might want to have a situation like this: "my situation is already nice, it does not need to change"
But it's very difficult to have a story with a premise like this.
The situation itself would basically have to be interesting.
You could follow a person on their regular work or hobbies, which would be more interesting in a fantasy world or if that work/hobby is interesting.
There could even be small bad things happening, but nothing too serious.
Probably would end up being comedy...
1
-
1
-
I wouldn't say, lucid dreaming is the opposite of meditation or that you take control over your dream.
It's like experiencing situations as if you were awake.
Normally you can't do things you can't do in reality and often the situations are pretty normal.
You can try to change the dream to your will, but this will probably destroy it. Especially if you try things, that are unrealistic.
But if you don't stay focused, it will turn into a normal dream and you lose control and might also lose knowledge that it's a dream.
It's possible to do things, which are plausible to you. For example if you are in some room, you can leave the room and go to another room or go outside.
But you can't just start flying around or get some cute girl.
But if there is something interesting to do, for example some girl is nearby, you can try to interact with her. Trying to do too much yourself will probably destroy the dream, though.
You can still get some custom experiences using what I call dream logic. If you think, something might happen, it will happen. Your wishes and fears will become real, if they seem plausible.
I walk outside, when it's dark and think "I hope, there are no wolves outside". Then the wolves were already attacking and eating me.
This dream logic is basically how normal dreams work. But if you at least know, that you are in a dream, and don't want to waste too much concentration and destabilize your dream, you might think about what would be plausible to happen in the current situation, which you would like to experience, and it will happen.
The best thing is, every emotion is intensified in a dream. So good experiences will feel even better. But emotions also make it difficult to concentrate and destabilize the dream again.
Sometimes it's also possible to fly, just because I already had some flying dreams, so it might make sense to be able to fly while dreaming. But I can't enforce it. I can't just say, this has to be a dream, so I'll just fly, it's more like I know I'm dreaming, so it would make sense if I could fly. At least if I jump out of the window.
At least that's my experience of it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Isn't it a good workflow to merge develop into your feature branch at least once a day? It's similar to CI, but other people won't be disrupted by having to relearn changes of an unfinished feature.
For example, I rename a method and add a few similar methods and then remove some, I don't want to be used, after I'm sure, which are the best methods.
If I do CI, everyone has to learn the new methods, if they need one of them, and maybe they use one, I want to remove later, but can't anymore because it alreaty has been used.
So I just merge the develop every few hours, so I see, nothing breaks, and when my feature is finished, I merge it to develop.
1
-
1
-
12:21 I think, that's why I had for most of my life.
The first time I had it at a very young age (maybe 7).
It was after playing Zelda 3 at a friend, the part where you go into the dark world on the mountains, and the background is filled with stars.
It was scary, but I couldn't just ignore it, since I knew it was the truth. Since it is the truth.
Why does anything exist at all? What if just nothing existied? It's not just a thought. It's not a dream I can wake up from. Life is meaningless, and everything will be over one day.
When I get these thoughts, I start to panic and just want this to be a dream. I just want to exit and be back to the main menu of this game.
But this thought couldn't be a dream in any universe, since it's just reality. It's rooted in fundamental logic.
I don't have it very often anymore. Maybe once a year, maybe even less often. Only when I kind of try to get it, when I actively think about this stuff, like right now. Maybe I'll get it now, but I doubt it.
Sometimes I even kind of miss this feeling. At least it's kind of exciting.
But having to go to school or nowadays my job is annoying. It feels pretty meaningless then.
But I think these thoughts might have helped me to think freely.
It's difficult to scare me with real world problems, especially abstact ones which don't directly concern me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I recognized this in my own fantasy world, and started do work on new ones.
That fantasy world had a bunch of races, and even if not everyone of that race had the same trait, there was at least that preference.
* the "armor humans" mostly live in caves, are strong, not very emotional, especially the men, the women maybe a bit, but more at the level of human men
* the "bird humans" value traditions, live non monogamous (males have harems, but when they leave, the women look for another men)
* "amphibian humans" can be very wise and intelligent, but also tend do be playful.
* elves don't have much personality, are emotionally stable, live very long and stay young for long. They were made to be used as slaves.
* and humans act different depending on where they live.
* and if a fantasy creature lives long enough in a place, where multiple races live, they often adopt their behaviors
I guess my races are not that stale, or at least it could be changed to be better, but I somehow didn't like the premise of having many different races anymore.
The "hat" thing can probably also thought of as a bias, but in reality not everyone is like that, even in works, where you see it.
But why do you have to add "bird human" instead of just adding a new culture, who consists of the same race as everyone, but they live non-monogamous and are more traditional in comparison?
Most of the time cultures are enough and races are not necessary, especially races with so many differences to the "default" race (probably humans).
If these races are nor really important to the stories, just use standard races.
Or find a reason, why you need bird humans.
The best reason probably would be the ability to fly.
But that's not enough. Besides that, it needs to be important to the story, that other people cannot fly. Else you could just add a civilization, where everyone is a "bird human" or "angel" or whatever flying race you prefer.
1
-
So ein Gedankenloop ist doch noch keine Depression. Wenn schlimme Dinge passieren, dann muss man sich da eben mal Gedanken drüber machen. Nur, wenn man keine Lösung findet, fängt das an, eine Depression zu werden, oder nicht? Da hat mir mal Cola geholfen.
Ne richtige Depression ist halt, wenn man erkennt, dass das Leben an sich unsinnig ist, und man dagegen nichts tun kann. Man muss halt dann erkennen, dass die eigenen Gedanken auch unsinnig sein können, oder die negative Bewertung dessen nicht zutreffen muss.
Das war doch jetzt mehr eine Werbung als Aufklärung über Depression ^^
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I'm not sure, what to do in such a situation. Don't write back seems bad, writing long responses seems bad, so writing short messages every few months seems like the best solution, right?
I also think about writing about the problems I have with her in text messages. But I don't think, it's a good idea. I want to talk to her about more serious stuff in person.
She probably just sees me as a friend, and I don't want to make a huge problem out of not getting messages back.
On the other hand, it's really annoying not to get answers.
I wouldn't care if she clearly tells me, she doesn't like to be with me anymore.
I've already let her go some time ago, after she didn't answer anymore for some time. I first was sad and then thought, it has to be over. I was fine with it.
But after half a year, I thought, I'll do some boring smalltalk and after some time we met again.
And I realized, how much I like her. I almost forgot about that...
So should I write her, how annoying this can be to me?
Should I tell her, I'm not really interested in this friendship anymore, if she mostly doesn't even answer?
Should I tell her about my fears? What I think, could be the real reason for not writing and meeting as often.
Or should I even tell her, how important this friendship is to me? That she's the only girl, I meet in person. That she's the only person I can talk about basically anything without being judged? And the only person I meet, who seems to have similar political views as me?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tylergronk-wd9dx
I think, most people would agree nowadays, besides of some rapists maybe.
But different people would
I also think, this might be a cultural phenomene of our time.
I wonder if Christians from a few hundred years ago would have agreed.
They maybe didn't even know the concept. Sex was just always fine if you are married, but it's wrong if you aren't, right?
And even if they had the concept of rape, the standards would be a lot different than nowadays. They already are different now than 30 years ago.
When does it count as rape? What acts are considered immoral?
Radical feminists have probably different opinions than conservatives.
There are whole cultures, where women are less valuable than men. It has been like this for most of the time in most places of the world. Men could basically do everything to women. They sold their daughters to rich men. They had involuntary sex, but in exchange they might have had a less worrysome life and give birth to a lot of children.
Maybe the women didn't even understand they are "raped". It was just normal to them. It was just how life is.
From a biological perspective I would argue, it's better for male genes if the man impregnates a woman, but only if he can care for her and his children. It doesn't really matter if the sex is willing. It probably shouldn't be traumatizing, else this might also affect the children negatively.
Also women probably prefer men, who aren't too violent, so if you are a rapist, the chance is high, that the woman will try to leave you and find a better man. A "morally good" man.
That's how it's even established in the first place, what is "good" and "bad".
1
-
1
-
@tylergronk-wd9dx I'm not sure if you even want to understand that view.
You know what's right and wrong, and that won't change, so you can probably only make fun of views which don't have this very fundamental premise.
I get, why one might think, there is absolute evil and absolute good. It is beneficial if you know what's good and evil for someone and for a society. If someone really believes, there is no real good and evil, what should you base your beliefs on? Even if you have your own beliefs, everyone else might have different beliefs. That's why it's bad for a society to believe in subjective morals.
If there are objective morals, there has to be a reason, why they are objective.
A simple reason might be a god, but that would be the same as a (benevolent) dictator who tells whats good and bad, so it would be a different kind of subjective moral.
Or it's moral because it's good for society. And things which are good for society are often the same, that's why they are seen as objective by many people.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nicopeindl9211 „Man kann ja nicht frei bestimmen, ob man übergewichtig ist“
Im Prinzip schon. Man wird ja nicht durch nichts tun übergewichtig. Man muss schon was dafür tun.
„Wenn wir nicht zwangsimpfen und alle behandeln wollen, dann werden wir wieder einen Lockdown brauchen“
Lockdowns waren nie eine gute Idee. Mal abgesehen davon, dass viele behaupten, dass ein Lockdown nichts bis nur wenig bringt, halte ich das für einen nicht hinnehmbaren staatlichen Eingriff.
Es wird immer so getan, dass der Lockdown eine direkte Folge von Corona ist. Dass es das nicht ist, sollte jedem klar sein.
„Demokratie heißt, das Volk entscheidet“
Demokratie ist kein Argument. Wenn etwas Unsinn ist, dann bleibt es Unsinn, auch wenn die Mehrheit das anders sieht.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@science_is_fake_and_gay2710 At least I don't get addicted to the drugs I use.
Most of the time it's alcohol and coffeine, so nothing special.
And both can sligtly change my daily routine.
I might have a good creative idea, so I start a new project or continue working on some existing project, or I find a solution to a problem, which held me back for some time, and I get new motivation.
(I mostly work on programming stuff, but also 3D modelling and writing sometimes)
But I might also just get a bit out of control and eat more than else (especially when drunk), or get horny (especially after drinking coke).
This might lead to a downward spiral, which I normally recognize after a few days and sometimes that's a starting point for a longer time of abstinence (from porn or (sweet) food, I never do drugs regularly, except on special occasions), but normally it's just a few days
So I should not just use drugs too often, when I'm productive and in a good mood.
1
-
1
-
1
-
The people of my fantasy world are immortal in the way where you don't die naturally and have improved healing powers.
I also want to touch the concept of immortality, but it probably won't be the main focus.
I don't fully agree about the stuff you say. It's a matter of perspective.
Even in my probably finite life, I often have very good moments and bad moments.
And I would probably do the same if I knew I couldn't die.
The main problem is, when you are immortal, and your friends aren't.
But in real life, it's already similar. Most of your friends don't stay friends for many decades.
And during your life even most of your relatives die and sometimes are replaced by new ones, move away or start avoiding you, etc.
So you have to find new friends every few years anyway.
Or maybe you are just happy alone.
You could do a lot of things when immortal.
One day you read a book you already read a few hundred years ago, and only remember it being good.
For some time you train until you become the best boxer in the world, and then just go on and do different things again.
Maybe you are very dedicated in something and will become the person, who knows more than everyone else about a topic.
Maybe you just want to appreciate some interesting mathematical concepts and what they have to do with the real world.
Maybe you teach every new generation about the best N64 games (assuming new people are coming).
And on the other hand, you could also just kill yourself if you really had enough.
Maybe you would kill yourself even earlier.
Most people know, they will die anyway some day, so even if they don't like their live, they will most likely just go on. Maybe it will get better again.
If there is no specific ending, you might just quit early. Like when watching a movie, and you don't like it, but you know it's almost over, you would also just watch the end.
Maybe I would have killed myself during some kind of existential crisis, but then thought "I will die anyway, let's just enjoy life for now".
But after thinking a lot, and even imagining a bunch of stories about immortal characters, I guess I would just want to stay living.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1:35 Yay, Lisp!
I think he has a point there.
Lisp was my first programming language, I really got into.
It seemed so weird at first. Everything just looked the same, no matter if it was a function call, a macro call, control flow, type definitions or function definitions.
But the different syntax is just an abstraction for humans. It's not necessary.
Before I only used Java in school.
And I did a bunch of programming in GML (Game Maker) to create many unfinished games.
Then I started to get into C++ for Graphics Programming (with old OpenGL), and also tried a few others, one of them being Go.
But I never really used a standard library.
But when I got into Lisp, I really learned all of the language features, including the more obscure non-standardized ones like the CLOS MOP, and I also used a package manager for the first time (quicklisp).
I used Common Lisp for around 3 years almost exclusively. Whenever I didn't like something about the language I thought, I could simply fix it by using macros, preventing me from really getting into other languages, especially if they weren't S-Expression based.
Aferwards I had another phase, where I tried a bunch of PLs, most of them being inspired by Lisp, like Stanza, Dale, Scopes, and also started to get into Rust.
I still think Scopes has potential to be the best programming language. It's basically Lisp, but using an indentattion based syntax, being more low level than C, having a borrow checker, havnig three kinds of macros, useful multiple value return semantics like Lua. Basically Common Lisp, but everything is better.
I think, the best programming language is basically Rust, but with S-Expression based intermediate format.
I think, the programming language should not be monolithic, but be devided into two layers: The semantic layer and the syntax layer.
The semantic layer defines the core features, and it's defined in S-Expressions. It only is about thinks like if it's statically or dynamically typed (by default), if it's garbage collected, does it have classes, interfaces, etc, a borrow checker, etc.
The syntax layer is just a syntax, which could work for different languages. It is just a different format for S-Expressions.
So a C-like syntax, a python-like syntax, a node based visual language, a voice based programming language, etc. all map some format to the same S-Expression format.
I hope, this will happen to Rust one day, too.
1
-
1
-
I would try to rebel as much as I can.
Just say, your new computer does not support google drive or something like that.
And using another computer is against your beliefs, or something like that.
But if you somehow can, you should probably leave school and not go to university.
In school, you normally don't learn efficiently, and a bunch of unimportant things.
I think, it's best to learn the things you need by yourself.
The good reasons for visiting school and university are these:
* you are forced to do something => but it's better to learn how to motivate yourself. You will need this later anyway
* you get certificates, which for some jobs are important => but they are not that important. In the time, you normally would "learn", you could work on your own projects, or learn even more, find important contacts to other people, etc. which would all help you finding a good job.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Mir geht es da eher umgekehrt. Bin zwar Fan von Söder, und fand anfangs die Reaktion gut, also lieber frühzeitig und effektiv als zu spät und dann vermutlich auch länger, bin aber langsam nicht mehr sicher, ob die Maßnahmen gerechtfertigt sind.
Insbesondere der Verbot von persönlichen Treffen außerhalb der Familie macht mir zu schaffen, vor allem, da ich selbst sowieso kaum soziale Kontakte habe, und so die Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass ich den Virus weiterverbreite, auch relativ gering ist, auch wenn ich verstehe, dass es gerechtfertigt ist, weil viele bei solchen Regeln wohl täglich mehrere Leute treffen würden, und es so keinen Sinn hat.
1
-
@achimwokeschtla7582 Am Anfang fand ichs auch ganz cool, hab die anderen endlich dazu bekommen, sich mit bestimmten Tools zu beschäftigen, was lange schon überflüssig war, jetzt aber unumgänglich, und war froh, dass ich nicht immer in die Arbeit fahren muss.
Hätte selber nicht gedacht, dass es für mich ein Problem werden würde, komme sonst allein auch sehr gut klar.
Hab auch schon Unternehmungen mit Familie gemacht, und ein paar andere coole Dinge, die ich vorhatte.
Aber ganz ohne direkte soziale Kontakte außer Geschwistern und Eltern ist halt auf Dauer doch schwierig.
Und sowas wie New York sind halt auch Extremfälle, wenn Leute auf so dichtem Raum zusammenleben. Ich bezweifle, dass es bei uns so passiert wäre.
Schließung von Schulen, Großveranstaltungen und Clubs sehe ich auf jeden Fall ein. Bei den anderen Maßnahmen bin ich mir aber nicht sicher.
1
-
1
-
@falko7387 Du schreibst wirres Zeug.
Die kritischen Stimmen kommen doch zu Wort (auch im Mainstream, siehe Lanz), und die Stimmen zeigen auch Wirkung. Es gibt aber offenbar auch vorschnelle Löschungen.
Ja, Impfpflicht ist auf jeden Fall kritisch zu beurteilen, schaden ja immer auch ein bisschen. Ich hoffe auch auf bessere Lösungen. Aber besser als die Krankheit selbst zu bekommen, ist es vermutlich.
Die Frage ist halt, ist es diesmal wirklich so ernst, wie es ja aussieht, oder haben die entsprechenden Leute nur bessere Propaganda-Methoden entwickelt?
Es sieht jedenfalls auch sehr nach Propaganda aus. Im Fernsehen wird Ständig Corona und Solidarität wiederholt.
Und zwar auf allen Sendern das gleiche. Über jeder Sendung steht #WirBleibenZuhause, die ganzen Promis ziehen mit und kommen auch überall.
So gut, wie da auf einmal alle mitmachen, ist das schon sehr besorgniserregend.
1
-
@achimwokeschtla7582 Ja, hast richtig gerechnet.
Jetzt muss man aber noch beachten, wie diese Zahl zustandekommt.
Bei einem Durchschnitts-Todesalter von ca. 80 Jahren kann man davon ausgehen, dass bei einer Gesellschaft mit ungefähr gleichmäßig verteiltem Alter jede 80. Person stirbt. Das wären ca. 5 mal so viele, also 1 Mio. Da wir aber mehr alte Menschen haben und die Bevölkerung schrumpft sind es vermutlich noch mehr.
Also im vergleich zu dieser 1 Mio. sind die Corona-Toten nicht signifikant. Die meisten sind zudem bereits auch relativ alt, die negaitve Auswirkung auf die Wirtschaft wird sich also in Grenzen halten.
Zudem sind ein Großteil dieser 200.000 Corona-Toten in den über 1. Mio Toten, die zum Durchschnittsalter beitragen bereits enthalten, was heißt, dass diese Zahl noch kleiner sein wird.
Klar könnte man jetzt versuchen, die Alten noch ein bisschen länger am Leben zu halten, aber dafür hat sich ja sonst auch keiner interessiert. Also diese 200.000 wird man auch mit einer Impfung kaum retten können, mit Glück haben sie vielleicht ein paar Jahre länger.
Inwieweit es Menschenverachtend ist, auf Kosten der womöglich gefährdeten Personen sein eigenes Leben einzuschränken, ist ein anderes Thema.
Das, was man aber realistisch erreichen kann, ist, dass die anderen Leute, die durch korrekte medizinische Behandlung gerettet werden können, auch diese Behandlung bekommen können. Und darum geht es dabei ja. Und das ist zumindest theoretisch auch ohne eine Impfung möglich.
Und wenn man es schlau macht, dann kann das eben auch sehr schnell geschehen, eben dadurch, dass nur die gefährdeten Personen nicht infiziert werden.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I know, how to start a project. I already did that many times successfully.
But I don't really know, how to finish a project because I normally don't do that.
That's probably part of the reason, why I have more motivation to start new projects.
Sometimes it's necessary to have a goal in mind, sometimes I just get motivated from the initial idea.
Often what I do leads to nothing, but that's not true.
Maybe I can reuse something I created along the way. Or maybe I will have a better understanding when I start a new project the next time.
I might also continue work on some old project after some time and make new progress and also have the initial motivation again, since I now know more accurately, how I do it and what I want to achieve.
But sometimes I see some old one and just want to restart because it's not usable.
Or I try to use it because I don't want to do everything I already did, again, and then get stuck because modifying is almost more difficult than starting over, because I want to do it in a way, so that the next time I use it, I will have an easier time, and maybe create a few useful libraries in the process... (I'm getting too much into detail already)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Part of why I don't like vim is becasue it uses specific keys to represent specific meta keys, which aren't even ordered in a useful way.
Besides that, I already have most of my meta keys on a different layer of my standard keyboard position, like arrow keys, numpad, enter, backspace, etc. (I use neo layout).
And when using a non querty or similar keyboard layout, keybindings don't make sense anymore anyway.
Programs should be keyboard layout independant, if the positioning of the keys is more important than the symbol they represent in the current layout.
And it's not that difficult. Just use the scancode, which your windowing library hopefully provide (winit does).
1
-
1
-
1
-
Die Interpretation von Prof. Dr. Roland Imhoff halte ich für Unsinn. Ich gehe davon aus, dass es evolutionär eben sinnvoll war, immer das Schlimmste anzunehmen, und für diese Fälle vorbereitet zu sein. Und ganz egal, ob es in diesem Fall eine Verschwörung ist oder nicht, es könnte ein andernmal eine sein. Und dagegen kann man eben etwas tun, beispielsweise indem man dafür sorgt, dass wenige Personen nicht zu viel Macht bekommen.
Im Fall, dass es ein Zufall ist, kann man einfach nichts dagegen tun, daher nützt es nichts, nach dieser Theorie zu handeln.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Keep Calm
Ich bezieh mal alles vorwiegend auf die letzte Wahl (die EU-Wahl).
Also perfekt ist die AfD natürlich nicht, ist halt einie der wenigen Parteien mit über 50% Übereinstimmung beim Wahlomat.
Gibt halt keine bessere, nichtmal bei den Kleinparteien (außer die PDV, aber die war bei der EU-Wahl nicht zugelassen).
Einige Themen, die angesprochen werden, finde ich sehr gut, die von anderen Parteien nicht oder nicht Ernsthaft (FDP) angegangen werden.
Eines der Hauptanliegen war ja, den Einfluss der EU zu verringern, und das halte ich für eine gute Sache.
Meine Grundeinstellung ist eben, dass die Verantwortung möglichst bei den Einzelpersonen liegen soll, und erst an höhere Institutionen abgegeben, wenn sie sich lokal nicht mehr lösen lassen. Und selbst dann ist es im Normalfall vorzuziehen, wenn man das im Dorf, Landkreis, Bundesland regeln kann, nicht gleich Deutschland- oder EU-weit. Und für irgendwelche Extremfälle gibt es auch schon so genug Regulierungen.
Erfassung von Schwerkriminellen wie Mördern ist eines der wenigen Dinge, die man vermutlich möglichst weiträumig angehen sollte.
Ein anderes wichtiges Thema ist Netzpolitik, insbesondere das Einsetzen für Meinungsfreiheit, was seltsamerweise von vielen nicht mehr als besonders relevant angesehen wird.
Zudem bilden sie den einzigen politischen Gegenpol zu Feminismus und damit befreundeten sexuellen Ideologien (Glaube an neue Geschlechter, Überbewertung der Sexualität und Überhöhung abweichender sexueller Ausrichtungen (Homosexualität, Bisexualität, etc.)).
Der Blick der AfD aufs Thema Klima scheint mir auch angemessener als der anderer Parteien, und sie sprechen auch an, was bei der Flüchtlingspolitik schief läuft.
Das heißt nicht, dass meine Ansichten bei diesen Themen genau mit der AfD übereinstimmen. Ich kann das auch genauer erläutern, einfach nachfragen, aber ich glaub, das ist schon lang genug geworden.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Klar führt das nicht zum Ziel, wenn ihr ganz unterschiedliche Ziele habt.
Jojoelch wünscht sich eine Verbesserung der Gesellschaft durch gemeinsame Richtlinien, Any möglichst viel Freiheit für den Einzelnen.
Das Problem an Schulzwang ist eben, dass dort nicht zwingend das gelehrt wird, was später beruflich benötigt wird, und es auch ein hohes Potential zu Missbrauch der Schule zu Propaganda gibt.
Aber jemand, der Kindern jegliche Entscheidungsfähigkeit abspricht, ist für mich unglaubwürdig.
Natürlich wissen Kinder oft weniger als Erwachsene, aber auch Erwachsene wissen Vieles nicht, und dennoch sind wir der Ansicht, selbst Entscheidungen treffen zu können.
Erfahrene Bezugspersonen können vielleicht dabei helfen, bessere Entscheidungen zu treffen, jedoch ist es oft nicht möglich, jemandem zu seinem Glück zu zwingen, auch nicht seine Kinder. Dann kommt es oft vor, dass man sich aus Trotz anders verhält, als von einem erwartet wird.
Stattdessen sollten Eltern ihren Kindern möglichst viel selbst beibringen, erklären, begründen, und möglichst wenig durch Zwang lösen, das ist oft Kontraproduktiv.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I guess it's because of semantic versioning.
Everyone tried to switch to semantic versioning in the recent years.
Semantic versioning is a versioning scheme, which has exactly three digits, the major version, the minor version and the patch version.
The patch version is just increased for small patches which don't really change anything, mostly bug fixes, the minor version is used for new features, which don't break anything, and the major version is used for breaking changes.
In general, it's not a bad idea to use such a versioning scheme, I think, but I also think, projects shouldn't switch versioning scheme if they already have some versioning scheme.
For example LLVM had versions starting with 3 (3.4, 3.5, 3.6...) for years now, and a few years ago they switched to semantic versioning, and since they break something (most users probably won't even notice anything), they have to increase the major version with every new release (twice a year).
The current LLVM version is 13.
Especially in a case like this, where basically every version introduces breaking changes, it doesn't sound like a good idea to use semantic versioning to begin with, even if you start it as a new project, but they had to follow this trend of semantic versioning, just because everyone is doing it.
In this case, I'd stick with the core idea of semantic versioning, but allow small breaking changes inbetween minor versions, so huge changes are still recognizable as huge changes.
And I don't know much about browser development, but I'm pretty sure, the same has been happening to browsers.
I wouldn't blame this problem on the browsers, though.
Websites should be prepared for every possible version number anyway...
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I probably have burnout according to your description.
I often have a lack of motivation and stay at home most of the time and doing the same time.
I kind of like my work. It's the job I wanted as a child (gamedev). Not everything is perfect, but it's a good game we work on, I have a lot of freedom on how I work, my boss trusts me, I don't even work full time.
But I'm often not as productive as I want to. I get distracted and can't concentrate. I'm tired etc.
I'm still getting things done, but often I think, I could have done it faster.
I probably just need more sleep.
Sometimes I go to parties, do some workout or work on private projects, and when I get started I often like it, but most of the time, I'm just too tired and unmotivated to even get started, so I eat, watch videos, play games and watch porn at night.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Youtube kann da doch nichts machen. Selbst wenn Youtube einen Weg findet, das sinnvoll zu sperren, gibt es ja noch genug andere Videoplattformen. Vor allem, wenn dezentrale Plattformen wie d.tube mehr im Mainstream ankommen, wird es wohl sehr schwierig werden, die Verbreitung solcher Kommentare zu verhindern.
Ich finde aber auch, dass Aufklärung hier die beste Lösung ist, statt Zensur und Verbote. Die Eltern haben die Verantwortung für ihre Kinder, nicht Youtube oder Videoplattformen.
Wenn die Kinder etwas hochladen und sich sogar über die aus Sicht der meisten Erwachsenen unangebrachten Kommentare freuen, ist doch erstmal nichts daran auszusetzen, solange nicht mehr passiert. Wahrscheinlich werden es viele bereuen, wenn sie älter sind, aber die meisten werden einen für sowas wohl keine Vorwürfe machen, und man selbst hat wahrscheinlich auch was draus gelernt.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
When I was a bit over 20 I had used Java, GML, Python, C++, Go, Common Lisp, Scala, C, Julia, Dale, Scopes
1
-
12:30 I think, I realized that myself.
I often have many unhealthy habits at once (not enough sleep, no sports, always sitting in my room, watching YouTube while playing video games, eating unhealthy, watching porn).
When I stop one at a time, the others get stronger. I don't necessarily need to fix all of it at once, but fixing at least two of them is necessary to get out of such a behavior. If enough bad behaviors are fixed, the other ones weaken automatically.
But it's most important to replace the bad stuff, I'm doing with healthier stuff.
So sport is a good start, especially when going outside for it. It directly fixes the sports problem, and besides that I can't play video games or eat unhealthy when I'm not at home. But also starting or making progress in personal projects.
If I find something, that's more fun than my bad behaviors, I often think "Maybe I should watch a bit of porn again", but then I often think, I still want to finish something, or I want to be fit for working more the next day, so I don't even get that interested in following some on my unhealthier habits.
But the difficult part is to find a project, that's long time engaging.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1