Show Navigation
Notices by Verius (verius@community.highlandarrow.com), page 31
-
Ah brexit. While I applaud the fact that there is finally some progress it would be rather jolly for those of us left in the EU if the UK could make up its mind about what kind of future relation with the EU it wants (and no "the kind where we get a vastly better deal than any other country" is not appealing to us).
-
Argument on Reddit about how some project is stupid for not allowing // comments. Actual message: https://lists.suckless.org/dev/1411/24056.html . While I would say not having // sucks a bit the arguments do make sense.
-
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-tech&m=151284802201397&w=2 There is some merit in the idea that in meritocracy you are not equal if you do not try / put the effort in to be equal.
-
Out-GridView is really nice as well when exploring data since you can interactively filter.
-
Hmm, this could be useful https://community.highlandarrow.com/url/318071
-
And while there are plenty of alternative build systems I have a nagging suspicion that using them is signing up for an extra dose of pain since the dotnet core cli is build around a neutered version (no inline code) of msbuild.
-
As annoying as make can be at times it's massively easier to understand than the Thing Known As Msbuild. Yup, I'm spending time in Windows land these days, work and all that.
-
Horrors, eldritch horrors and enterprise webservices.
-
Trump touts poll showing his approval rating is 45%. Err, dude, that still means your approval rating is negative.
-
@slrock Ah, morality is an interesting subject. I agree that to some extent we as humans have a basic concept of morality, however unlike gravity morality seems to affect us all differently. I wouldn't agree that it is relativistic by nature, there are certain ground rules that are pretty much in every culture. However there are aspects of morality positively unique to certain cultures and that's why morality as a broad concept is rather difficult to handle, in the context of gravity it's like talking about all of physics. I do agree however that morality is inherently a social construct in the sense that it is inherently related to other beings. Historically all of good and all of evil is defined through the interaction with other beings; animals, humans or gods.
-
It turns out that code files with a million lines are a real drag on IDE's. It's pretty sad when I have to resort to notepad to view a file.
-
@6gain @maiyannah Indeed. Einstein's theories are still largely considered correct not because they are sacred but because they've been attacked time and time again and (most of them) have not been proven false time and time again.
-
@6gain Well, yes and no. I'm not sure acid rain actually has any real relation to climate change (as in leading to global warming), though it is a case of environmental damage. And importantly it's a relatively easy case to make since you can simulate the mechanisms behind it in a lab. That said I do believe there is a strong case to make that humans are responsible for a large part of global warming. How large a part compared to natural causes and what the impact will be is more murky as far as I understand it. If I understand things correctly the models aren't yet accurate enough to give more than a fairly broad range of outcomes (which inevitably the media will report the most dramatic outliers of).
-
@slrock It says that an object always falls in one direction, that there is some kind of "force" dragging things down. That's the very essence of gravity as commonly understood. It's true that it doesn't say what gravity is, but that's not what's being discussed.
-
Really, if you mock people who don't believe in climate change because essentially they don't accept argument by authority (scientists say so) you're just communicating to me that you religiously believe in climate change rather than rationally.
-
Furthermore even hard-to-test-yourself things like orbital dynamics are in contrast to climate change easily testable: you simply perform an experiment and see if the results match your hypothesis. There's very little wiggle room with physics at the non-quantum level. Climate change on the other hand is about such a complex system that it's effectively impossible to experimentally prove or disprove. It's really more about gaining insights, applying understanding of e.g. the effects of CO2 on heat radiation and then making complex models and in the end you hopefully can test those models against data that wasn't used directly or indirectly in the training of the model. On a "how clear are you going to get a result from your experiments" climate change research is actually worse than even things like high energy particle research (which costs a lot and has to deal with quantum probabilistic stuff but there's a good way of determining if a hypothesis is very likely to not be disproven).
-
Mocking people who deny climate change by pointing to gravity: not a good idea. Gravity isn't accepted because a lot of scientists say so, like with climate change. It's accepted because everyone has immediate personal experience with it. Climate change on the other hand cannot be established with simple experiments, even pointing at higher temperatures is insufficient since what's meant with climate change is about humans being responsible for a changing climate rather than more high temperatures being a natural occurrence. That requires a lot of difficult data gathering and analysis and therefore in effect trust in scientists whereas gravity requires no such trust.
-
@maiyannah @bob Then you have a law problem if such contracts are allowed.
-
With regard to unions I like the Dutch system best. Unions negotiate with employers for standard contracts, which sometimes are declared binding on everyone in an economical sector by the government but it doesn't matter if you are a member of a negotiating union (there are usually multiple unions involved) or not, the rules apply to all evenly.
Verius
All Jonkman Microblog content and data are available under the