Contributing to open source is a big one. Purely personal projects are good, but I’ve found way more people are interested in open source work because it’s ‘more real’ and it shows you can work as part of an organization.

deleted by creator

If you aren’t cringing at your past at all, then you aren’t growing.

Threw me too, I did not parse “Skywalker Hughes” as a name at first.

It’s 1/4, that’s why you get two dice jokers in the fragile challenge.

Needs approval by 3/4 of state legislatures; it’s not enough to control the US congress. Supreme court shenanigans or some other BS is much more likely.

This is referred to as healthspan or HALE and has been gaining research interest in recent decades.

I thought the same thing; I’d love to see more low-poly style IRL. The CT looks impressively terrible from the back though.

There’s plenty of great stuff in there; I especially recommend filtering for dead hardware.

I can’t say I feel the prog vibes in this one.

I just the other day edited a Steam config file with some wacky file extension by cracking it open in notepad. Bless plain text.

Don’t forget Kodi!

I’m not complaining; I’m clarifying for less informed readers. It’s a subtle and often misleading distinction.

Calling a license that leads to more proprietary software “even more open source” is absolutely debatable. The only extra restriction is disallowing free software becoming proprietary, which promotes more openness overall.

You’re not wrong by any means, but people should understand the actual tradeoff when considering licenses.

More open strictly in that it allows free software to be rolled up into proprietary software.

Just because competition can be suppressed temporarily within a discrete system doesn’t mean it has ceased to exist. Exactly why ideologies that demand the absence of competition will eventually be outcompeted from the outside.

The health of the current system is undenianly declining, absolutely. But competition is eternal and non-optional, so systems that seek to eliminate it are intrinsically doomed.

Well, competition has been going pretty strong for the last four billion years; time will tell.

Yes, exactly! For all the noxious effects of greed, it drives competition which drives evolution.

Even if a utopian communist/anarchist society were able to stabilize on its own, it would inevitably be overcome at some point in the future by a more competitive society that had martially evolved beyond the utopia’s understanding.

Whether its right or wrong has no bearing on the entropy of it.

In this context, I think ‘dehumanization’ really means declaring someone not a valid person, rather than any specific assertion of species. A conflation of person/human much in the way gender and sex are often conflated.

Well that and extremely standardized platforms, with all the benefits that entails.