I would auction shelf space at my mega chain grocery store to large brands. The highest bidder would have the opportunity to buy up all the shelf space in order to bury any potential competition. The bidder could create 100s of different labels of essentially the same goddamn product, in order to maintain the illusion of choice, maximize consumer confusion, and thus maximize the time a customer spends thinking about the shelf-dominant brand, for some otherwise dead-simple purchase, such as toothpaste.

Mustard only?! I am definitely the dog in the hot dog car.

deleted by creator

No one’s disputing the utility of wireless. But it’s not harming anyone to have a device with both mini-jack and bluetooth; the way it was for nearly 2 decades without any complaint.

or a adapter at greater than 20x cost

On “mutual ownership”. I’m not convinced that anything, whose agency has been removed through confinement, can be said to have equal weight in the decision to be owned, and thus be claimed “mutual”.

You give evidence of our like behavior with other animals, and claim that my position MUST operate from the belief of our “difference and superiority”.

Consider the inverse: Humans are not distinct and not superior. Therefor, all animal behavior is acceptable human behavior, for we are not but animals.

Its not exactly the society most would want to live in. People can and do use animal nature as means to justify horrible behavior. “Its a dog eat dog world, the villain proclaims”, as if the only surprise is that their victim would have expected it any other way. Mantises devour the male after copulation. Why then do you demand I not do the same?! Pointing to the way things are in nature as a means to find justification for human behavior doesn’t seem to lead to a useful foundation for ethics; maybe it even to to its dissolution.

So yes, I think we’re different. I think that in many ways our difference comes from our responsibility of stewardship. Because we do have knowledge, agency and control to the degree that we can destroy or restore environments.

Picking up wild animals which would much prefer to be left alone, so you can get your picture taken, is not loving them. Keeping animals in cages so you can have something on your shelf to look at, is not loving them. Most animal ownership is possession for the possessive, masquerading as caring.

I would advocate for using each tool, where it makes sense, to achieve a more intelligible graph. This is what I’ve been moving towards on my personal projects (am solo). I imagine with any moderately complex group project it becomes very difficult to keep things neat.

In order of expected usage frequency:

1. Rebase: everything that’s not 2 or 3. keep main and feature lines clean.
2. Merge: ideally, merge should only be used to bring feature branches into main at stable sequence points.
3. Squash: only use squash to remove history that truly is useless. (creating a bug on a feature branch and then solving it two commits later prior to merge).

History should be viewable from log --all --decorate --oneline --graph; not buried in squash commits.

As a long time CRPG fan, I was not into it at all. But expressing that you didn’t enjoy it is wrongthink, and the rabid fans will downvote you to oblivion.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

lol yeah I guess it depends on the length of the sentence and the context. Context is usually pretty clear for questions, and maybe exclamations are typically short enough that the ‘!’ is already visible anyways. Definitely wasn’t considering periods and commas in that list.

I like the prefix marks. I wish we used them for all of our punctuation. They improve readability. Imagine if we removed the leading double-quote on our quoted lines.

The problem with Lemmy is that the demographic is so skewed. Its mostly hyper-tech nerds mixed with political activists. I like tech and politics but its a bit of a toxic brew and I haven’t found myself having that much fun over here. On reddit, there’s comedy and people not being angry because someone isn’t using linux. Lemmy often feels like a glorified arstechnica link aggregator. Its just kind of a sad place compared to reddit. The other day u/shittymorph made some posts that made me laugh super hard. I haven’t laughed at anything over here, because well most of you aren’t funny, haha me neither so don’t feel attacked. But lemmy not attracting comedians, and having the top post in here be “Dont” really makes it seem like the people here prefer being sad and lonely. sorry its not a direct reply to your query, as some actionable advise your seeking, just me attempting to articulate what i enjoy about reddit that I feel like i don’t see here yet. I don’t how to get someone like shittymorph over here. I don’t know if there’s anything that lemmy offers that appeals to a person like that, that’s enough to make them start creating content over here. Maybe we just need people to stand up the sort of communities commedians would be attracted to, even if its a bit out of our wheelhouse, but idk. Authenticity is important and faking it is easily seen through.

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

It reduces the probability that a drive by scanner is going to detect a vulnerable service. Camouflage isn’t a guarantee that you aren’t going to be sighted on a battlefield, but it’s still a good idea to reduce the probability of becoming a target in whatever ways you can.

True, but I see this quote repeated so often that it kind of bugs me. It seems to be used in a thought-terminating way. As if we shouldn’t criticize languages. As if they aren’t tools that are able to be improved upon, or they’re all made equal. But I’m sure Bjarne Stroustrup needs to fend off hostility and unfair criticism as much as any programmer with a successful language.