- 20kxbox went up in flames with the xbox one, which was around about when microsoft as a whole started to get run by business types that had no idea what they were doing whatsoever. 2013 was when xbox permanently lost the console 'war'
- Yep, this exactly. Its completely unacceptable
And its not something that's just a 'you' problem - if you want the actual underlying issues in physics to be fixed, its a massive issue that the spokesperson for fixing those problem currently may be a bigot, or at the very least endorses bigots and sex pests. Beyond just being generally completely unacceptable, it allows everyone to completely dismiss whatever is being said very easily
For the other poster, ben goldacre is someone that's become very well known for making effectively the same points as sabine, but within the pharmaceutical industry. They sat down and basically wrote for decades about how the testing was absolutely broken, multiple books, a column, and producing lots of work on how broken studies were in medicine and talking to anyone that would listen - and as a result, they were actual able to enact effective change. It was a huge win for evidence based science!
Sabine is not someone who can achieve that in physics - her videos would be much more effective if they contained actionable content and concrete analyses of the issues. I'd have a tonne of respect for her if what she did was publish papers or videos showing the degree to which the literature was broken, analysing funding, conducting interviews (even if anonymous) with researchers, looking through examples of bad papers and explaining the problems to a lay audience. Producing a mixture of for-scientist and for-lay person material to break the figures down, in a way that produces a compelling argument
Instead we at best get specific examples plucked out of the air. I know she isn't massively overgeneralising the issue from my own personal experience, but she presents a terribly uncompelling argument as to why there are problems. Where's the data? Why are you writing book blurbs for sex offenders instead of writing papers?
That's why I've come around increasingly to the idea that she's a grifter, even though I used to enjoy her content (before it went out of the window) and think that she does likely genuinely care about the underlying problem to some degree. Its closer to ragebait than anything that feels productive now unfortunately. I don't think its even necessarily on purpose on her end - the right wing has a way of sucking in anyone on the fringes and giving them a home even without them knowing, but also why give her the benefit of the doubt?
- Great project, thanks for building it
>i want you to realize that that dog that hasn't barked is trump.. virignia spent hours at my house with him,, he has never once been mentioned. police chief. etc. im 75 % there
Hooo boy
- I agree with a part of Sabine's overall output, but she's increasingly misidentifying some of the problems and the solutions because she's drifted too far towards the grifters
To a large degree if you're trying to successfully trying to push for change, it really matters that the person pushing for it is credible. Someone like ben goldacre is able to credibly make a strong push for change within medicine because they've maintained credibility, someone like sabine makes the situation worse because they've chucked it away
- This is one of the reasons why I'm surprised to see so many people jump on board. We're clearly in the "release product for free/cheap to gain customers" portion of the enshittification plan, before the company starts making it completely garbage to extract as much money as possible from the userbase
Having good quality dev tools is non negotiable, and I have a feeling that a lot of people are going to find out the hard way that reliability and it not being owned by profit seeking company is the #1 thing you want in your environment
- Its also significantly lowered because management is forcing AI on everyone at gunpoint, and saying that you'll lose your job if you don't love AI
That's a very easy way to get everyone to pinky promise that they absolutely love AI to the ends of the earth
- The problem with sabine is that she's become the worst person to make a correct point for the wrong reasons
If you do research it becomes pretty apparent that a high number papers are not great. There's varying issues, but a big one is that the funding model incentivises pumping out papers which are often of low quality, researching whatever happens to be in vogue at the moment
Literally everyone I've ever talked to in research as a frank conversation knows that this is a massive problem, but nobody wants to talk about it publicly. Research funding is already completely screwed as it is, and researchers are incredibly aware of how fragile their livelihoods are
Its clearly leading to a big reduction in the quality of the literature. I went on a replication spree recently and found that a pretty decent chunk of the field I was working in was completely unreplicable by me, with a few papers that I strongly suspect 'massaged' their results for various reasons
I wish someone would talk about this who wasn't also in bed with right wing grifters, and was actually credible. We need someone more like ben goldacre for physics
Sabine's most interesting content is the paper reviews, and where she sticks to actually examining the evidence - but it makes up a tiny fraction of what she produces these days, and her support for some truly grim figures is just gross
- Models don't think they're anything, they'll respond with whatever's in their context as to how they've been directed to act. If it hasn't been told to have a persona, it won't think its anything, chatgpt isn't sentient
- I mean, we kind of do though? We could assume that the surviving images of statues showing how they were painted are accurate. If you know the colour of the underlayer, this actually lets you determine exactly what the colouration of the paint on top of that is despite it not being present whatsoever
This gives you a general trend of how brightly underlayed statues tended to be painted afterwards to finish them, and lets you infer how other statues without surviving coloured pictures of them would have appeared based on the likely prevailing style at the time
- Braid didn't start the indie boom, Garry's mod did
- Pictograms let you parse a lot of information at a glance, because you can pattern match a group of differing symbols much faster than you can a block of text which all looks uniform. It lets you skip reading all the text when you're familiar with a dialogue, and you can short circuit what you need to click on without having to read
That's the reason why pictographic additions are so useful. Its the reason why we distinguish different kinds of UI elements at all, because colour and graphics are incredibly powerful shortcuts for parsing information
- Companies should. Its a business risk, you open yourself up to legal action
- I always find it amazing that people are wiling to use AI beacuse of stuff like this, its been illegally trained on code that it does not have the license to use, and constantly willy nilly regurgitates entire snippets completely violating the terms of use
Edit:
https://github.com/vorg/pragmatic-pbr/blob/master/local_modu...
https://github.com/vorg/pragmatic-pbr/blob/master/local_modu...
This looks like where the source code was stolen from: this repository is unlicensed, and this is copyright infringement as a result
- Tortoisegit isn't an ide though, and the quality of git integration varies wildly between different ides - many of them have pretty toy integration. Its much nicer to have proper quality support of uniform quality, rather than having to rely on whatever you happen to be using at the time
Ideally I'd like to avoid having to reimplement the whole thing from scratch using ad-hoc scripts
- I do virtually everything through tortoisegit, and much prefer it over a CLI. When you right click, you get this:
https://i.postimg.cc/hG4g8pjp/tgit.png
Which gives you basically everything you could ever possibly want. My main use cases for it vs a terminal interface are:
1. When you commit, you get this:
https://i.postimg.cc/90YJBtz1/boaty.png
Clicking the files brings up a diff, which makes pre commit reviews extremely easy. Its a lot faster to add files via an interface like this, rather than using a cli
2. The graphical log feature is pretty indispensable for complex projects. Eg check out this:
https://i.postimg.cc/qRb76Wxj/godot-mergy.png
This is much nicer than trying to do grok this through the cli for me. Reverting commits, cherrypicking, merges, splicing the history, seeing all the available branches, keeping track of orphaned commits etc, is all super easy
3. If I have to pick between not remembering the CLI commands off the top of my head, and having to memorise and alias a whole bunch of commands to be able to use git fully, I'll pick the former every day. Its the same reason I use an IDE
I wouldn't object to it being a standalone tool, but the nice thing about it being on the context menu is that it doesn't intrude when you don't need it
- Does anyone know if its possible to get shell integration working?
The sole app keeping me on windows is tortoisegit: you right click, and get a bunch of git commands on your context menu. If there was any way to get this running in linux, I'd swap
- codeblocks. There are dozens of us!
- I have absolutely 0 idea why any developer would rely on any IDE produced by google. It'll be canned within 5 years max, with 3-4 seeming like a reasonable estimate of the lifespan of the product
I've been using my current IDE for 17 years, and plan to continue using it for at least another 15
- >Instead of doing those things, you just put up with it. Or, worse, you fight through your anxiety using an earlier solution that required willpower, and the exertion of willpower makes you feel like you’re trying. But the feeling of effort doesn’t mean that you’re Actually Trying.
The peak level of this is when you deliberately don't put in the effort to change aspects of how you approach a problem, because making the problem easier to solve would make it feel like you're cheating at solving the problem. And that somehow the effort of solving something in the fundamentally wrong/high effort way makes you more valuable as a person than the people who find an approach that isn't beating your head against a wall
Even though, weirdly, simultaneously you hold the cognitive dissonance of the fact that you don't actually judge people who do attempt to solve their problems more healthily, and actively give the advice of doing that to friends
- Its worth noting that the idea that great apes have learnt sign language is largely a fabrication by a single person, and nobody has ever been able to replicate this. All the communication has to be interpreted through that individual, and anyone else (including people that speak sign language) have confirmed that they're just making random hand motions in exchange for food
They don't have the dexterity to really sign properly
