Meh, how often do you really do some serious work where you’re not on your own hardware? Depends on your job I guess, if you’re company tech support and walk around to people’s PCs the whole time, but if you’re a programmer or similar, when are you really not going to do your work on your PC?

It’s not like you can’t work with a default layout afterwards, you’re just going to be a bit slower on one. It really didn’t happen very often for me in years of working.

I simply made my own keyboard layout. Accent grave is just a single press for me, altgr+accent is the “normal” combining one. Also changed äö to () and shift+äö to [].

It’s not that hard, it’s just a markup file I had to copy+modify and put in some folder.

You’re using the wrong language. If it fails, it never worked out of the gate. You should say that it seemed like it’s working, but never actually did.

No, we haven’t. There are several good alternatives.

I would love to wear more earplugs, but no matter what I do, I always seem to get ear infection after wearing them.

The thing is, are they really leaving money on the table? Higher prices means less customers, yes, but also higher profits per unit. We don’t actually know right now how many people would be willing to pay these new prices: if it costs twice as much but half the customers are still fine buying it, then profit stayed the same. And with no choice, I suspect much more than half are going to pay double.

Of course, the people who wouldn’t do that are a potential market, but they are also a much lower profit margin. Comparably, that’s probably not that much for these people.

The problem is not doing it, the problem is feeding an AI generated text here.

When I pirate something, I have no clue what company or service it is from. How is it giving them a platform?

my default mode of thinking assumes that I am the best at everything

Well then you are not quite with me though, I’m not even remotely the best at most things, and I know that. Everyone is pretty terrible at the things they haven’t practiced, and I haven’t spent a significant amount of practice with most things.

But to me, it is not important in the evaluation of how good I am in total that I’m good at many things. Everyone has different things that they are good at. Rather, for example, my ability to accurately assess my skills in different areas is one of the things what makes me actually good, i.e. not overestimating myself in things I’m terrible at, and not underestimating myself in things I’m actually good at. I think that is a skill everyone should be good at.

Obviously, this whole evaluation includes a plethora of factors, and this is just one of them. Truly getting into why I think I’m probably one of the best humans around would take too long for such a casual thread, and is likely not even close to being desired information for anyone.

And it’s not even guaranteed that my evaluation is any good, and anyway, everybody’s evaluation is different. I do not actually know if the criteria by which I judge myself and others are good right now, it’s very possible they change in the future once I know more. Other people’s set of criteria might be better than mine. As such, I don’t actually presume to tell anyone what I think of them unless they specifically want to know.

I’m not at any specific “mode” and I do think my way of thinking about myself is very healthy.

Very good, I think I’m probably one of the best humans on Earth, yet I still am far from perfect and have so many places where I can do better.

Maybe we just need to market it as the first step for viable railguns

It does. I’ve been using it as my secrettool for quite a while instead of kwallet in KDE kwin wayland.

Instead of letting the large language model think for you, I would suggest to try critical thinking for yourself. I sincerely mean this in a kind way, because if you continue with this, you may become a drone like the ones we talk about here, and I wish that on nobody. I know this current path is easier/more convenient, but sometimes one has to choose the harder path to arrive at a better result.

That’s what they’re saying:

When deployed, the soldier is launched into a designated hunt-zone. He navigates purely via visual landmarks. His brain constantly screens the nerve data from his eyes. When an object matches its classification matrix (e.g., a specific mobile missile launcher), the organism locks onto the pixel coordinate, arms the ESAD, and executes a terminal dive completely dependent on human input.

Rye/wheat mix sourdough. It’d look like yours if I baked without the phase of very hot temperature at the end, and without the added oat flakes and flour on top.

Ok, let me rephrase, “it’s quite obviously more profitable”

You’re right. It’s not about the code though, it’s about the interaction with the individual submitting the code. It is natural for humans to want to use language that is meant for communication between humans to actually reach humans.

Bread sharing thread

I’m not talking about the work contributors do, obviously that is invaluable.

But if you do a review, and you see that a function should be extracted at one point to avoid code duplication, is it really faster to tell the contributor that a function needs to be extracted there, compared to just extracting it yourself as you see it?

The value of a review is collaborative truth finding and learning. If there is an LLM on the other end, that’s just not happening.

That is just mostly wrong. Around 90% of the time, when you do a review, just fixing the issue that you found is much faster than explaining the issue and saying what needs to be done instead.

Reviews plainly are for educating the contributor to what constitutes “non-shit”(using your terminology) code on the repo. If that wasn’t the case, you could just not do a review and just change the code, without any interaction at all. Why would you communicate the change that needs to be done otherwise?

Rarely of course, something is so complicated that it actually takes more time to come up with the right code than do a review. But that is only a rare thing.