It’s a young field and we’re still entrenched in the consequences of the sort of mistakes that, in a few hundred years, will become “those silly things people used to do because they didn’t know better”.
Daily reminder that the web is a mess of corpo bullshit piled on top of 90s tech and most OSes currently in use are culturally from the early 80s.
1066 MHz = 2132 MT/s, which is fairly average by DDR3 standards
PUBG if it was good
This is horseshit, Opus 130k stereo is perceptually lossless according to many public listening tests. All responsibility for poor quality rests on the uploader and sometimes on idiotic downloaders that still dare to shit out MP3 in the year 2024.
uh oh… zpool scrub
why the fuck is Thermaltake making chairs
thought this was about Game Theory for a split second
>“this is a deconstruction!”
>looks inside
>demolition crew
Geometry dash insane difficulty face
is this like the USSR
Many things that were conceptually conceived in the 20th century didn’t become viable until the 21st, such as OLED, VR and AR, raytracing, telesurgery, a whole slew of types of artificial organs, a gigantic amount of miscellaneous advancements in integrated circuit fabrication, alternative vehicle fuel such as methane, hydrogen and rechargeable batteries; maglev trains, innumerable safety improvements in aviation, mRNA vaccines and so on and so forth. I don’t think it’s fair to credit all that stuff to the 20th century, unless someone somewhere saying “be real cool if we could do that” counts as inventing something.
I did not interpret my original comments as genocidal rhetoric, but seeing as how they have been interpreted, I now realize that they contain an element analogous to that of “the conflict in Gaza is too complex”. I am sorry for causing this pointless argument and will be more careful with the implications of concise opinions from now on.
I do think that the substance of our disagreement here is minute and the “no good side” statement I opened this with is far from the best way of wording what I was referring to here. Please note, however, that at no point did I bring “shades of gray” or “both sides equally bad” into the conversation, and that the antagonistic nature of your gotcha is deeply reductive, insensitive and automated.
I wholeheartedly agree with the moral character of Ukraine’s self defense. What I don’t agree with, however, is the moral character of the US, a supplier of “aid” that never gives anything to anyone for free.
I once again inquire what fascist state you were so unbelievably convinced I was simping for.
It’s rather misleading to portray Ukraine as a democracy in any sense of the word, but I’m curious as to which fascist state you’re immediately convinced I’m simping for here. Is it perhaps my own country, which I’ve watched debase its entire population with the plague of Christianity, authoritarianism and anti-“wokeness” into a horrifying type of zombie that still has the audacity to call itself a Russian “person”, all just to distract us from 200% cumulative inflation in 12 years that has reduced the horizon of planning of most of its people to one week, with the state replacing the notion of “law” with “obedience” in the process to polarize every living thing that has a brain?
I do not operate under the terms “the saviors” and “the baddies”, nor do I believe that the US should cease military aid to Ukraine. I’m just committed to dispelling the image of normalcy that a “good vs evil” portrayal creates.
I don’t think Russian imperial warfare in Ukraine is necessarily contradictory with American imperial interest in Ukraine
to think this conflict involves “the good guys” in some way is laughable
The screw heads are mainly to prevent people from tampering with stuff they aren’t supposed to unscrew. Hard drives, for example, all use the same star-shaped heads that most people don’t have screwdrivers for.
I do think that people passionate about information technology – those who love it for the intrinsic awesomeness and not the money it brings – could break away with some of the legacy bullshit that holds back the quality of the software we use, if they were given the opportunity to defy software “tradition” and the profit motive. As of now, there is no systemic path forward, only occasional improvements incited by acute inadequacy of existing conventions for the growth of interested businesses.