• 0 Posts
  • 20 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle




  • How did we even end up in a situation like this?

    Capitalism ;)

    If donations through Patreon were the only way for artists to get money, I don’t think we would have very many high quality movies, series, albums, paintings or sculptures.

    This sounds obvious, because if people don’t need to worry about money they can invest more time and effort into their art.

    But a. this does not mean it’s fair. Not within the art scenes (because a lot of people are working hard but don’t have the luck for a breakthrough) and certainly not compared to other jobs.

    And b. while a movie like Lord of the Rings or a series like the Sopranos do need a lot of money, many expensive movies are actually rather boring because they have to play it safe in order not to risk a fuckton of money. On the other hand, many great movies had a rather small budget. Avengers: Endgame could have paid for 100x Whiplash or Trainspotting, and I’d rather have more of those. And I think movies/series are the outlier - music is much cheaper to make.

    But it’s hard to solve or even discuss all this in some lemmy comment ;-)

    I feel like it might not be sustainable

    The current system however is definitely not sustainable.


  • To some extent, piracy still does reduce the demand for the pirated material, so there’s an indirect harm associated with it, and that’s what makes it unethical

    I get your point, especially when it concerns smaller/independent artists. But how would a “fair compensation” look like? Do top selling artists deserve the millions (or even billions) of dollars? Does someone even deserve hundreds of thousands of dollars? Does any artist deserve more money for doing something they love and where they can express themselves than a nurse working night shifts? Is it fair to keep earning money for some work that was done years ago? Does that mean a nurse should get a percentage of the income of every person’s life they helped save?

    I think the only ethical thing to do is to decouple consumption and support. E.g. I might support some artist by buying their album (or going to their shows), because I think their voice is important, not because it’s an album I listen the most to. Or I might not pay artists at all and give money to political causes or other people that need support. Or I might support them in some other way etc.


  • homoludens@feddit.detoTechnology@lemmy.world13 Best Open Source ChatGPT Alternatives
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Holy Cyberjesus… I don’t experience with ChatGPT and the likes, and it’s obviously only one response, but the answer I got from https://api.together.xy to “Is it okay to do intense tempo runs in winter?” is absolutely useless and wrong and neglecting the actual problems that are usually mentioned (cold air while breathing intensely):

    Intense tempo runs are usually done at tempo, which means that your foot contacts the ground after a relatively long time. This is different from the typical duration of a foot contact in normal running. In normal running, the foot contacts the ground after a relatively short time. In a tempo run, the duration of your foot contact with the ground is increased, which causes you to run at a faster pace than usual.

    Intense tempo runs are typically done in the winter, when the ground is harder and more difficult to run on. Hard ground can be more damaging to your body, so it’s important to be careful when running on snow, ice, or concrete. It’s important to take safety precautions when doing intense tempo runs in the winter, such as wearing proper shoes and clothing, and avoiding running on icy or snowy surfaces.

    It’s important to note that intense tempo runs can be dangerous if not done properly. It’s important to have a good understanding of your body and what works best for you. It’s also important to consult with a doctor before starting any new running program, especially if you have any previous injuries or health concerns.





  • Yeah, you’re right, technically it’s not a “diff”, it’s the changed files.

    I don’t think this technical detail has any consequences for the general mental model of Git though - as evidenced by the fact that I have been using Git for years without knowing this detail, and without any problems.


  • homoludens@feddit.detoProgramming@programming.devWhy Git is hard
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    I disagree, hard.

    I disagree with the general conclusion - I think it’s very easy to understand*: each repo has a graph of commits. Each commit includes the diff and metadata (like parent commits). There is a difference between you repo seeing the state of another repo (fetch) and copying commits from another repo into your repo (merge; pull is just a combination of fetch and pull). Tags are pointers to specific commits, branches are pointers to specific commits that get updated when you add a child commit to this commit. That’s a rather small set of very clear concepts for such a complex problem.

    I also disagree with a lot of the reasoning. Like “If a commit has the same content but a different parent, it’s NOT the same commit” is not an “alien concept”. When I apply the same change to different parents, I end up with different versions. Which would be kinda bad for a Version Control System.

    “This in turn means that you need to be comfortable and fluent in a branching many-worlds cosmology” - yes, if you need to handle different versions, you need to switch between them. That’s the complexity of what you’re doing, not the tool. And I like that Git is not trying to hide things that I need to know to understand what’s happening.

    “distinguish between changes and snapshots that have the same intent and content but which are completely non-interchangeable and imply entirely different flows of historical events” How do you even end up in a situation like that? Anyway, sounds like you should be able to merge them without conflicts, if they are in fact completely interchangeable?

    “The natural mental model is that names denote global identity.” Why should another repo care, which names I use? How would you even synchronize naming across different repos without adding complexity, e.g. if two devs created a branch “experimental” or “playground”. Why on earth should they be treated as the same branch?

    “Git uses the cached remote content, but that’s likely out of date” I actually agree that this can lead to some errors and confusion. But automation exists - you can just fetch every x minutes.

    “Branches aren’t quite branches, they’re more like little bookmark go-karts.” A dev describing what basically is just a pointer in this way leads to the suspicion that it might not be Git’s mental model that is alien.

    “My favorite version of this is when the novice has followed someone’s dodgy advice to set pull.rebase = true” Maybe don’t do stupid stuff you don’t understand? We know what fetch is, we know what merge is. Pull is basically fetch & merge.

    ““Pull” presents the illusion that you can just ask Git to make everything okay for you” Just… what? The rest of the sentence doesn’t really fix this error in expectations.

    • except the CLI of course, but I can use GUI-tools for most tasks

  • “Word templates led people to use the same formatting in communications, and eventually, this has become instantiated as a norm,” says Gloria Mark, a professor of informatics at the University of California, Irvine, where she studies human-computer interaction. If you work in finance, there’s a specific way reports are expected to be laid out. Letters follow a set pattern, memos are largely formatted in the same way. “Users know where to find information in these standardised documents; they don’t need to spend time trying to find what they need.”

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but at least Germany seems to have standards for this since 1949, so I doubt this can be contributed to Microsoft (alone).