BoxwoodSeed

But how do you discover the good ones?

Nevermind the generational leaps, there has been a lack of creativity and a flood of low quality titles that make it harder and harder to find the few good games among them.

I've had better luck finding great games I didn't know about from the 1990s than from the past twenty years.

> felt like you were playing a tech demo

Seems like that description fits a whole lot of modern (read: everything from the past decade) games. And some of those even enjoy success and are beloved by many players for some reason, like Breath of the Wild.

Free software is not about money. It's the freedom to do anything with it, including redistribution. A concept that resists enshittification.

It's usable, but there's plenty of room for improvement. Never got started with Plex since it's not free software. No matter how much better Plex was it would never have been worth it down the line. I learned that lesson by using Opera circa 2012.

Who was it that said he'd never let his education interfere with his learning? I'm in favor of learning, but what we think of as education isn't particularly conducive towards that.

Playing an instrument (or rather learning new pieces to play) is super efficient brain training increasing your performance in pretty much everything else that requires you to do thinking.

Just like all school problems of this nature I have ever seen, the question lacks precision.

How long does a production run take and how many units can you do in a single sun? Since this isn't mentioned, the answer is to produce everything at the last second of the year. But we are also missing information on why the factory needs to produce 12,000 components in a year and for whom and about the logistics involved in getting those components to the buyer.

I always hated these type of questions for their lack of precision. You haven't even mentioned how many units in a single production run will be faulty and need to be scrapped instead of delivered, how am I supposed to optimize anything?!

Neither did I, so I bought an U5226KW for $3000, when a similar sized TV was only $700.

> Being on time for transportation that goes across the country is kind of expected, right?

You'd think so, but the trains are regularly arriving late. It's not like a single train will always bring you to your destination. You'll have to switch trains multiple times and when one of your trains is late, you won't make it in time for the next and will have to wait.

> No one is arguing a complete replacement of cars

You might not be, but I've had this discussion countless times with people advocating for banning cars. I'm not against public transport, I'm just saying it has unresolvable issues that prevent it from being as useful as a car.

How else are you supposed to make larger purchases, like a car or a house? Nevermind company purchases, like a large container ship.

Saving up money naturally leads to wealth inequality. And the saved money can be used to earn more money.

> have a vibrant middle class

Are there countries with less wealth inequality that have a more "vibrant" middle class (whatever that means)?

Public transport isn't only within a city. It's also for traveling to a different city. Or half across the country. Within the city I just walk everywhere.

It's common for trains going to different cities to only come by every two hours. If you are somewhere more rural it might only come once per day, if at all.

I didn't think it worth mentioning, since these issues are true regardless, but I do live in a large European city with functional public transit.

> I strongly suggest visiting a city with good public transit

I live in one. What you are talking about is fantasy. I'm German and live in a large city.

The reality of it is that within the city I just walk everywhere, because taking the tram isn't worth it for small errands. Neither in time nor in money.

When I need to travel to a different state, using public transit is awful. It doesn't only need to be decent in one city. It needs to be decent across the whole country. Because if it is not, I still need a car. And when I have a car, I might as well use it, since it's more convenient.

Cars scale, because if on one day for some reason only a single person wants to go anywhere, only a single car will be deployed. And on the next day, when suddenly a million people want to go anywhere, up to a million cars will be deployed.

Getting stuck in jams is down to badly designed roads. For example the use of traffic lights, whose only job it is to stop the flow of traffic.

---

If you need to take a bike or walk, then why not just go to your destination that way? I'll also have you know that not every passenger can have a bike when riding a bus or train. Capacity doesn't allow for this.

---

What use is a rental car for carrying lots of stuff? First you need to go to where the rental car is and then you have to bring it back. Unless the rental car can drive by itself to where you are and drive by itself back it seem really cumbersome.

The issue with carrying stuff is that this will come up eventually and once you already own a car since you have to, why not use it when you don't necessarily have to, just because it is convenient?

---

Can't do much about society. We unfortunately do not lock up insane people anymore and there are even talks of putting mentally disabled people into normal public schools. We live in crazy times.

---

You WILL definitely wait up to 2h, maybe even longer. In fact, you will just be happy that eventually something does show up to take you home. Of course, you can then declare that whatever system you have is not a "decent" transportation system, but it will be reality, unless you live in a state capital and only travel within the city. Once you need to travel to a different state all bets are off.

---

My argument isn't that that cars are better and more convenient than public transport, my argument is that public transport has inherent issues that are impossible to solve and can therefore never replace the role cars have in society as the default.

I hope for a future with cars on demand, where they drive to your home by themselves, you use them, and then they drive off by themselves. But even that won't work very well as it means other people using these cars and thus their cleanliness being in jeopardy. Guess the only way to solve that is by using something I don't want: a surveillance state.

It's what we have collectively dreamed of for decades: a flying car. The things you mentioned are what I'd call implementation details of what boils down to a box with four wheels and a steering wheel.

This isn't anything practical. It's just cool. Like a hoverboard. Or landing on the moon.

Wealth inequality obviously is a good thing as otherwise no one could save up for larger purchases. So far I don't see an issue with having this inequality be really, really big.

It's not a zero sum game, after all.

Public transport has inherent problems that cannot be solved that will always have it be less convenient than a car.

(1) Does not pick you up from your home and does not drop you off at where you need to go.

(2) Does not start at your schedule. Missed by a hair? Wait up to 2h.

(3) Impossible to transport more than you can carry.

(4) Does not scale. When there are too many people, some will have to wait for the next train or bus. When there are too few people everything still moves around nearly empty.

(5) Being exposed to the public, which could mean drug addicts and insane people that will stab you in the neck for no reason. But mostly just smelly lowlifes that might take a piss in front of you.

No matter how great your public transport is, it cannot solve these inherent issues while being cheaper than a car.

Those types don't have to work usually, so they have all the time to waste on the Internet.

I agree, but then learning to code isn't much of a hurdle. It's a similar effort to learning vim. The difficult part is getting to know the language. I never coded in Haskell for example and learning to use that language would take effort. On the other hand, it would be pretty easy with an LLM at hand.

It might even help in figuring out whether Haskell would be a good fit. Something I couldn't do, as I do not know the language. Then again, it's not a question that really gets asked much in a corporate setting. Most things are just solved in a few popular languages, whether that makes the most sense or not.

I am reminded of the scene of a guy walking through various layers of security to access a computer that isn't connected to any network and still wonder what the hell this guy's job was in Mission Impossible (1996). The data got stolen either way, because of course it did, but what highly sensitive work can you even do on a computer not connected to any network?

If there's too much security in the way, it seems to me that work becomes impossible.

I don't really understand why people insist on treating cheating like something that has to stop. Back in the days before the Internet was a thing, just playing board games, cheating also happened. There are even board games designed around the concept of deception.

Play single player games, then you can complain about cheating AI opponents.

Linux people aren't techbros? What are they called?

Quite obviously? Male and females are differently wired, so to speak. A Norwegian comedian did an entire documentary about it back in 2010 [1].

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLWHTKnB0jqZD9cR0zMpNL...

SizeUp isn't a tiling window manager as far as a youtube video showcasing it goes and neither is Rectangle. It's more like an alternative to the Windows aero snap thing.

A tiling window manager is a different concept.

It's alright, but a step down from tiling window managers that you can use on Linux.

Next time you try Linux on the laptop, go with Void.

Isn't the only difference that people using servers are expected to have deeper knowledge? As someone using Linux both on servers and on a desktop, I see little difference.

Apple doesn't even have a tiling window manager as far as I know.

Based on everything I thus far know about WWII, I do not have the impression that Hitler wanted war [1], nor do I have the impression that their ideology demanded it.

If you also read what they published about themselves, instead of only what others wrote about them, the whole thing becomes a lot more nuanced.

[1] https://yle.fi/a/20-270673

There's also the thing where trade work is in the process of pricing itself out of what normal folks are willing to afford. Combined with Youtube tutorials and AI help that is getting better, it wouldn't surprise me if more and more people would just decide to do all this stuff themselves at a fraction of the cost.