• 0 Posts
  • 66 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 21st, 2023

help-circle
  • Should they? Yes. They should also be searching for previous bug reports. I’m sure a lot of people do. But if you have enough users, even if 1% of people don’t use good reporting behaviors, you wind up with a lot of duplicate or bad reports.

    There are plenty of blog posts out there that basically can be summarized as talking about how grueling open source work can be because users are often aggressive in their demands.

    But this is a prime example of debian “stable” doesn’t mean “no crashes” but instead it means “unchanging, which means any bugs and crashes will remain for the whole release”


  • bisby@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyz*Ackshually*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Hades meaning “the underworld” and not referring to the greek mythology. I believe also referred to as Sheol. It refers to just “the common grave of man” and not specifically “hell” as often depicted.

    Basically, “everyone comes back from the dead.” A lot of this section has flowery prose for over describing everything. “Graves and death give up their dead” is basically just “the dead come back to live so they can be judged” (which just further illustrates that nothing happens when you are dead, because you have to be resurrected just to be judged)



  • Because the dev gets a huge number of bug reports for bugs that were resolved 5 versions ago.

    They actually asked debian to stop shipping the screensaver, because they were getting tired of saying “this is already fixed, debian is just not going to ship the fix for another year”. Debian didn’t want to stop, so the dev added the nag screen, because it was the only way to stop the flood of bug reports for things that were already fixed.


  • bisby@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyz*Ackshually*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    The way a lot of it works out in the bible, is that when you die right now. you die. There is no afterlife, you’re in the grave. thats it. but then during the end times mentioned in 20:13-15, ALL the dead people are resurrected. And then the good ones get to stay alive and the bad ones go back to being dead. Thus a second death. So there is no “afterlife” then either… you are either eternally alive after armageddon, or eternally dead.

    Being dead is basically just being non-existant. Fully unaware of anything. Which if you are to believe the bible, that means you’re cut off from god entirely, who despite having just murdered basically everyone, is supposedly pure love and joy. So the end result is living in eternal bliss that is so great that you can’t even fathom, or being cut off from that and never even having a possibility of anything. FOMO of god is the ultimate punishment.

    I’m not even a religious person and the existential dread of “if it’s truly nothingness after I die, i won’t even have a way to experience the nothingness, everything will just stop” is enough to keep me awake some nights. So I can see how eternal nothingness was enough for the original authors to be considered horrifying consequence for not being religious enough, without having to resort to eternal physical torture.


  • bisby@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyz*Ackshually*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    7 days ago

    If we’re ackshually things, lets cover the references to the lake of fire in the bible.

    In revelations 19:20, there is the beast and the false prophet being tossed into the lake of fire.

    In revelations 20:9, a bunch of people are explicitly consumed by fire from heaven. Consumed, not burned forever.

    Then in revelations 20:10, the devil is added to the lake of fire with the beast and false prophet, and those three burn forever. But not the common folk.

    Lastly, in revelations 20:13-15, hades and death give up their dead, and people are judged. Bad people are tossed into the lake of fire, explicitly labeled as a second death, but not mentioned as being eternal torment.

    So in conclusion, the devil himself is spending eternity burning in the lake of “fire” (not lava or magma, nor is it underground, this is the apocalypse, this is happening on the surface of the planet that is being bombarded with heavenly shit), he’s not doing any torturing there. He is also not the one sending people there, and sinners don’t burn forever, they die when cast into the fire.


  • bisby@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzEquality
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    7 days ago

    Both sides are being unbearably obstinate here.

    The teacher’s meaning is clear and the kid should just answer what is being asked, not what is being said. So the kid is in the wrong. If you’re smart enough to be this clever, just answer the question.

    The teacher says “You are wrong, failed” when the kid is technically correct, instead of clarifying the intent of the question. So the teacher is in the wrong. “Clever, but you know what I meant” solves the problem. “You get an A in math and an F in interpreting language”

    On the flip side, I had a cousin who had a question on a test: “What is the largest SI prefix” … he answered “yotta” (which at the time was the largest)… And got it wrong. because the “correct” answer was “mega”. Because that was the largest the class had learned about at the time, and the teacher was very inflexible on this; they acknowledged that yotta was the largest, but my cousin had learned about it outside of class, so it couldn’t be an acceptable answer. The teacher couldn’t possibly fathom marking “mega” right for students who had only context from the classroom and also marking “yotta” right for students who had done independent research. No, the question was IMPLIED to be “what is the largest SI prefix [that we have covered in class]” and anything else was wrong.



  • bisby@lemmy.worldtolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldlow effort maymay
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 days ago

    my rant was not about your meme. But people actually use this argument seriously, and that frustrates me.

    And I will admit that learning a new system has a time cost, but once you reach experience parity, the time cost per problem is less, and the number of problems is less. In that way, the “time spent” is an investment rather than wasted.

    So A+ meme, it triggered me in all the ways it was supposed to.



  • bisby@lemmy.worldtolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldlow effort maymay
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    13 days ago

    The thing I hate about the “value your time” argument is that windows is shit.

    Let’s be generous for a minute and assume that windows and linux have the same amount of problems. Someone who is on windows for the past 30 years has 30 years of acquired knowledge and will probably know quickly how to solve it on windows, but not linux. Someone who is on linux for the past 30 years has 30 years of acquired knowledge and will probably know quickly how to solve it on linux, but not windows.

    So the entire argument is just “but I have muscle memory tied to windows, and I already know how to solve those problems, but I dont know how to solve the linux ones, so they take me a lot of research and time to solve, therefore all linux problems always take a lot more time to solve”

    On windows, I have to spend time fighting BSODs and finding out where to download software from that isn’t just bloated up with viruses, and how to run registry hacks to get rid of start menu ads and to stop microsoft from phoning home. None of those things i have to do on linux.

    On linux, today my biggest issue was figuring out how to change the keybinding for taking a screenshot… And that was an easy issue, but it’s also not even possible on windows.

    So I guess different types of problems. My “wasted” time is customizing my OS/environment so it works the way I want it to, not trying to fight back any ounce of control.




  • bisby@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyzPizza Pizza
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 month ago

    An epoch is a geological age and not a specific time span. So “65-145 Mya” (million years ago) would be the appropriate label. I can’t seem to find a label for “million years” (other than megaannum, which is just an SI prefix for years, but I don’t think Ive ever heard that used?)


  • You’re right. There are multiple definitions of the word stable, and “unchanging” is a valid one of them.

    It’s just that every where else I’ve seen it in computing, it refers to a build of something being not-crashy enough to actually ship. “Can’t be knocked over” sort of stability. And everyone I’ve ever talked to outside of Lemmy has assumed that was what “stable” meant to Debian. but it doesn’t. It just means “versions won’t change so you won’t have version compatibility issues, but you’ll also be left with several month to year old software that wasn’t even up to date when this version released, but at least you don’t have to think about the compatibility issues!”


  • Debian aims for rock solid stability

    To be clear, Debian “stability” refers to “unchanging packages”, not “doesn’t crash.” Debian would rather ship a known bug for a year than update the package if it’s not explicitly a security bug (and then only certain packages).

    So if you have a crash in Debian, you will always have that crash until the next version of debian a year or so from now. That’s not what I’d consider “stable” but rather “consistent”


  • bisby@lemmy.worldtoScience Memes@mander.xyza very emphatic answer
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    168
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I hate how these things always come up because “order of operations!” It’s mostly people who are bad at math remembering one topic they struggled with and finally got right, and now they know it’s a touchy subject so it will drive engagement. It’s the modern equivalent of “Mathematicians hate this one secret for solving equations! Click to find out!” Pure engagement bait.

    But in all the engineering ive done, things never really come up like this. If there is any potential clarity issues, parentheses would be used, or it would be formatted in a way that makes it much more clear.

    40 - (32/2), or 40 - ³²⁄₂ has no clarity issues imo. You don’t even have to think about order of operations because 32 halves is a number on its own. it isn’t an “operation” to do necessarily, it’s a fraction to reduce.

    And yes, I get the joke. The joke is making fun of the engagement bait of “some people will get the order of operations wrong!”

    The joke

    (40 - 32)/2 = 4

    If you stop here, you used the wrong order of operations. This is where the the fights normally start in the replies.

    but the kid said “4!” not “4”

    40 - (32/2) = 24 = 4 * 3 * 2 * 1 = 4!



  • IMO it doesn’t matter. People don’t read news on updates. Should they? Yes. Do they? No. Should they have to? Also no.

    Linus’s point is to never blame the end user for something the kernel changed. If you want software to have widespread adoption, adding homework to simple updates isn’t how you do it. People don’t want a hobby or something to babysit, they want an operating system. Debian will go out of their way to make in-release updates go as smooth as possible, but are willing to through out entire parts of functioning packages between releases.

    But this isn’t even about breaking things for the end user. This will create excessive amounts of noise on the upstream repo. People will say “Hey! My keepassxc broke!” and they report it to keepassxc, and not to Debian. To which keepassxc just has to constantly reply “no, debian changed this on you, this is not a bug.” If Debian had to deal with the fall out of their own decisions, I would say “yeah, im not sure if i agree with the decision, but oh well”… But they are increasing the workload for other teams.

    It is already happening. The debian dev’s stance is “This will be painful for a year.” But it will be painful for keepassxc, NOT debian. The keepassxc devs asked them to not do this. Debian’s response might as well be “Im inflicting this pain on you, even though you’ve asked me not to. But on the plus side, it won’t hurt me at all and it will only last a year for you.” If they really have that much disdain for the project, they should just stop packaging it altogether.

    So yeah, debian has the legal right to do whatever they want because keepassxc is open source. but “just because I can, and you cant legally stop me, and its extra work for you, not me” is kind of a jerk move. This is what drives FOSS contributors to get burnt out and abandon otherwise good projects.


  • It’ll also break all your keepassxc plugins soon. Because debian version to version compatibility is not a priority. They also don’t care if them breaking something triggers a ton of upstream bug reports, because it will only “be painful for a year”

    Linus for the kernel has a strict “don’t break userspace” policy, and Debian has a “break things whenever you want, and just blame the user for not reading the news file” policy.