231–240 of 313 posts
What a word of wisdom right there, the bit about internet is beautiful because it's ok to be weird - this is often the opposite on twitter, fb, reddit and many discords where if you have a different opinion you get mobbed by angry comments making one feel worse about their own weirdness.
Different opinion != being weird.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can 'throw' what you can afford and it will feel as satisfying. Just try it.
Somehow I feel it’s probably less satisfying if your contribution pays for a couple hours of developer time compared with the annual salary for an entire team. It’s probably more satisfying to be able to move the needle than not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you assume Hashimotos net worth is one billion dollars, a $400k donation is equivalent to a $400 donation if your net worth is one million dollars. I don’t believe donating $400 really feels that satisfying, the impact is fairly negligible in most contexts whereas donating $400k can very visibly improve a lot of lives. I think this illustrates just how much a billion dollars is and maybe why a very small wealth ta…
> If you assume Hashimotos net worth is one billion dollars, a $400k donation is equivalent to a $400 donation if your net worth is one million dollars. 1. Net worth is significantly less than that (taxes + heavy philanthropy) 2. $400K donation is orders (plural) of magnitude off our actual philanthropic giving in total. This is just one donation.
I am personally just tired of it, and it's brilliant to see someone thriving outside of the zone to working for work's sake. Even if the realities are different.
Hope we had more people like you whom we all could disagree with but mutually respect.
Cheers to a better future. (hope it wasn't too much waxing poetic but I feel like we are just too damn trapped in this tech bubble to value good moments these days)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's addressed as truth is not some holy artifact handed out for us by God, or what some theory of Logic defines as such. It's what people consider and call a truth. Language terms are defined by use. And people absolutely argue, fight, unite, or even go to war, for the version of those that they'll consider and call the truth of such matters.
The English language has multiple independent definitions of the same word. You’re misusing that ambiguity here. “sincerity in action, character, and utterance” is different than “the body of real things, events, and facts” This distinction very much exists in how people talk about such things. You don’t need to “have faith” that something like gravity exists such that when you trip you can fall down. “We hold these…
So? I didn't refer to truth in the former sense.
I said there are several kinds of meanings of the term "truth", and that the one that's about mere facts about things that can be measured objectively (the stricter version of your second definition) is the least interesting one.
The truths of the "We hold these truths to be self evident” variety, the truths of "this proposal is really bad", "this behavior is wrong", "this person is guilty", and many others even more nuanced varieties, are the ones that matter, and for those objective reality is nowhere near the "single source of truth", if it even applies at all.
I applaud this, particularly as I view Zig as a viable alternative to rust for many applications. Do I think rust is a positive addition to the Linux kernel. Absolutely. Would I reach for rust or Zig first when I was implementing a real-time audio synthesizer if I had to choose between the two? Unless Rusteze, a Clojure dialect hosted on rust existed, I would choose Zig. I sense a hegemonic power growing behind rust,…
Can you elaborate on this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you assume Hashimotos net worth is one billion dollars, a $400k donation is equivalent to a $400 donation if your net worth is one million dollars. I don’t believe donating $400 really feels that satisfying, the impact is fairly negligible in most contexts whereas donating $400k can very visibly improve a lot of lives. I think this illustrates just how much a billion dollars is and maybe why a very small wealth ta…
People with that much wealth should keep their money and use it where they see fit. A "wealth tax" forces some people to sell stock since not everyone has liquid assets. The CA "wealth" tax was written in a way that they could instantly turn $1B -> $1M or $100K overnight without a vote. So many reasons why it's not a good idea to have a wealth tax. But the biggest reason is that nearly all our tax money is going to f…
This is your brain on X.com.
It's great to be in a position to do this, however I'm beginning to think that their greater contribution is ghostty I don't really know how to value things any more when I see someone develop a tool that is kind-of useful that then gets acquired for half a billion dollars. As someone with a decent number of decades of terminal hopping, the improvement that ghostty has brought a breath of fresh air. To me it has repr…
I use Ghost TTY coming from iTerm for no other reason than I saw everybody else using and praising it. Is there some special feature I'm missing? I would only call it a marginal improvement. If that. I fail to see what the big deal is.
Among the "GPU rendered terminal" options, afaik Ghostty is the only one that has proper search/context menus, tabs, and scroll bars. I'm sure it's easy to get by without, but compared to the overall value-add of these terminals (which exists indeed but isn't tremendous either) I find it quite a significant downgrade, so I appreciate that Ghostty has both.
This is speaking from recollection engaging with programming communities years back - I found the Rust community to be interested and respectful of Zig but it didn’t seem to be well reciprocated, if anything much the opposite.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The English language has multiple independent definitions of the same word. You’re misusing that ambiguity here. “sincerity in action, character, and utterance” is different than “the body of real things, events, and facts” This distinction very much exists in how people talk about such things. You don’t need to “have faith” that something like gravity exists such that when you trip you can fall down. “We hold these…
> “sincerity in action, character, and utterance” is different than “the body of real things, events, and facts” So? I didn't refer to truth in the former sense. I said there are several kinds of meanings of the term "truth", and that the one that's about mere facts about things that can be measured objectively (the stricter version of your second definition) is the least interesting one. The truths of the "We hold t…
By acknowledging that nobody considers these objective truths, there’s nothing interesting to say on the topic.
You were playing around with the linguistic ambiguity for whatever reason using a different definition than was used by “There is only a single source of truth and that is objective reality.” and I called you out on it. Thus the subject dies.