Zompist Bboard Again

Raphael wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 1:53 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 1:53 pm Yeah, it's time to fork Python.

Good luck.

Well, I'm not a contributor to Python, so I am not really in a place to do so myself. Anyways, "respect mah authoritah"-type stuff like this from the steering committee with the CoC as a thin pretext shows them for the cancer they are, and just like cancer calls for surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation, this calls for forking in order to be rid of them.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 11:24 am

Ares Land wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 10:08 am I'm an engineer... though what I do at work often feels like witchcraft. Or black magic, on a bad day. It rarely feels like science. That's because I'm in IT, though -- I don't handle things at the level electrons are being pushed around; I'm dealing with other engineers' software -- so most of the time I'm dealing with their quirks, weird interactions between pieces of code, and the occasional bug.
I wonder how it is in other fields... How much of an aeronautics' engineeer job is pure, rational science, and how much of it is fiddling around the quirks of AutoCAD, or dealing with the engine manufacturer's weird ideas?

Agreed. I am a software engineer, and the vast majority of my do does not sound like what people call "science" -- it is largely futzing with code to get it to work well enough that I can be sufficiently happy with it. While initially there may be a good deal of rational design to things, that quickly goes away as "no plan survives contact with the enemy" and often degenerates to mere trial and error. In many cases I am just guessing until I come upon something that (mostly) works; for instance, this was the case with my single-precision floating point string (to and from) conversion routines.

I can sympathize with you, as such issues were the main reason why I forsook a career in software development - designing code was quite fun, but getting it to work just well enough stressed me way beyond the limit of the acceptable. Also, I developed a hatred against Windows and all things Microsoft which of course rendered me unfit for >90% of all IT jobs offered (meanwhile, tempered to a mere dislike). Thank goodness I am legally unfit for work because of my autism-spectrum condition, and live in a welfare state that pays my bills for that reason, so I have decided to use these regular payments as a scholarship to start a take on the fine arts. I am working on a solarpunk Gesamtkunstwerk my conlangs are a part of. Faced with the decision between wealth and freedom, I chose freedom, and am happy with that.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 1:53 pm Yeah, it's time to fork Python.

I'm sure there's a tongue-related pun in there somewhere.

Ares Land wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 10:08 am Devereaux's point, I guess, is that wizards would do very impressive things with magic (much like medieval builders and blacksmiths were impressive) but wouldn't systematize it or launch a magical industrial revolution. This works for medieval-ish fantasy... though not for, say, Harry Potter. (Of course some bright wizard would try and build a theory of magic, or run experiments.)

With medieval tech, I think this is still wrong. The medievals did industrialize systematically. E.g. the monastery at Clairvaux— one of hundreds— used water power for crushing wheat, fulling cloth, and tanning, as well as sending water to the kitchens and gardens, and draining waste. And this was the 1100s. And all this without any equations on fluid dynamics.

Alchemy has a well-deserved reputation for theoretical wrongness and practical charlatanism, but they actually learned a lot. They created distillation (enjoy your whiskey and vodka!) and pure glass, understood metallurgy and oxidation at a good practical level, and found the mineral acids which dissolve metals. You don't get Lavoisier and his systematization without a thousand years of increasingly adept craft work.

If magic is coherent and always works, then it can be exploited with at least that level of certainty and utility. Undoubtedly more so if you had a better theory behind it, but Devereaux's picture of a Roman blacksmith fucking up swords is not appropriate. (If a Roman fireball spell is as good as a Roman sword, you don't want it hitting you anyway.)

I'm an engineer... though what I do at work often feels like witchcraft. Or black magic, on a bad day. It rarely feels like science. That's because I'm in IT, though -- I don't handle things at the level electrons are being pushed around; I'm dealing with other engineers' software -- so most of the time I'm dealing with their quirks, weird interactions between pieces of code, and the occasional bug.

UI engineers talk about user models, which is the mental framework users create to make things make sense to them. It may or may not reflect how the software actually operates (the UI engineer's job is in part to minimize dangerous misconceptions). You can get a lot done with an inaccurate user model.

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 3:11 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 11:24 am

Ares Land wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 10:08 am I'm an engineer... though what I do at work often feels like witchcraft. Or black magic, on a bad day. It rarely feels like science. That's because I'm in IT, though -- I don't handle things at the level electrons are being pushed around; I'm dealing with other engineers' software -- so most of the time I'm dealing with their quirks, weird interactions between pieces of code, and the occasional bug.
I wonder how it is in other fields... How much of an aeronautics' engineeer job is pure, rational science, and how much of it is fiddling around the quirks of AutoCAD, or dealing with the engine manufacturer's weird ideas?

Agreed. I am a software engineer, and the vast majority of my do does not sound like what people call "science" -- it is largely futzing with code to get it to work well enough that I can be sufficiently happy with it. While initially there may be a good deal of rational design to things, that quickly goes away as "no plan survives contact with the enemy" and often degenerates to mere trial and error. In many cases I am just guessing until I come upon something that (mostly) works; for instance, this was the case with my single-precision floating point string (to and from) conversion routines.

I can sympathize with you, as such issues were the main reason why I forsook a career in software development - designing code was quite fun, but getting it to work just well enough stressed me way beyond the limit of the acceptable. Also, I developed a hatred against Windows and all things Microsoft which of course rendered me unfit for >90% of all IT jobs offered (meanwhile, tempered to a mere dislike). Thank goodness I am legally unfit for work because of my autism-spectrum condition, and live in a welfare state that pays my bills for that reason, so I have decided to use these regular payments as a scholarship to start a take on the fine arts. I am working on a solarpunk Gesamtkunstwerk my conlangs are a part of. Faced with the decision between wealth and freedom, I chose freedom, and am happy with that.

I on the other hand love the thrill of hunting the cause of the next bug and ultimately fixing that bug in addition to merely designing and building software. I get bored, and dissatisfied with being bored, if I have no challenges before me. Yes, hunting and fixing that bug may be utterly unscientific, but that makes it no less attractive. In cases like my floating-point conversion functions, just figuring out how to achieve what I seek, even if it is by trial and error, is enjoyable in and of itself on top of actually achieving it. (Things that are too easy to figure out are less attractive in a way, in that they don't present sufficient challenge for me.)

As for Windows and Microsoft, I have never been a Windows user outside work, and have never been and never will be at home with Windows. (My personal laptop does have Windows installed alongside Linux, as it came with Windows, but I have only used Windows on it to confirm that certain things would work under Windows. Also, my actual work at my day job is all under Linux or WSL2, and I largely use Windows for Office and the web.) My family's first computer was an Apple //e, and after that a number of Macs. I have been a Linux user since high school, when I bought an external hard drive for the family Mac with money I had earned (as my parents wouldn't allow me to wipe the internal hard drive) and installed LinuxPPC on it. Since getting my first PC of my own shortly before going off to college I have consistently run Debian GNU/Linux on my own machines to this very day.

(Yes, I host my software on GitHub, which is owned by Microsoft, but that is largely because it has by far the largest userbase of the source code hosting sites today. I did use SourceForge in the past, but over the years SourceForge has done some rather questionable stuff such as bundling junkware with one's own code, more questionable than anything GitHub has actually done, which has made me question the wisdom of using it.)

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 1:53 pm Yeah, it's time to fork Python.

Is it just a single developer that's removed due to the new rules, or are more expected to follow?

Zju wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 4:24 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 1:53 pm Yeah, it's time to fork Python.

Is it just a single developer that's removed due to the new rules, or are more expected to follow?

Well... basically a very long-time core developer referenced an SNL skit from the 1970's which bothered an individual because of a single word that happened to be used in said skit (he hadn't even mentioned the reason that said person was bothered himself), and the "steering committee" had a hissyfit, and because said developer repeatedly questioned the judgement of the "steering committee" on that and another thing where said developer questioned a rules change where only a majority of "steering committee" members needed to vote for a PSF member to be demoted (he was of the view that this ought to require unanimity or at least a supermajority) rather than bowing down and admitting fault and not questioning said rules change as he was expected to, said "steering committee" basically went "respect mah authoritah" and banned him for three months from developing on Python, while also telling other people that they weren't allowed to unofficially collaborate with him outside official Python development.

The thing about CoC's is that they attract authoritarian types and rules lawyers, as this shows, and as shown by other incidents such as when Sage Sharp attempted to get Ted Ts'o, a very long-time Linux developer (pretty much from the start), banned from Linux within days of the Linux CoC being approved because A) he was a "rape apologist" for having questioned the validity of a particular study on the prevalence of rape in the past and, more importantly, because B) he was the only technical advisory board which did not knuckle under and approve the commit for the CoC.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 4:16 pm

WeepingElf wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 3:11 pm

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 11:24 am

Agreed. I am a software engineer, and the vast majority of my do does not sound like what people call "science" -- it is largely futzing with code to get it to work well enough that I can be sufficiently happy with it. While initially there may be a good deal of rational design to things, that quickly goes away as "no plan survives contact with the enemy" and often degenerates to mere trial and error. In many cases I am just guessing until I come upon something that (mostly) works; for instance, this was the case with my single-precision floating point string (to and from) conversion routines.

I can sympathize with you, as such issues were the main reason why I forsook a career in software development - designing code was quite fun, but getting it to work just well enough stressed me way beyond the limit of the acceptable. Also, I developed a hatred against Windows and all things Microsoft which of course rendered me unfit for >90% of all IT jobs offered (meanwhile, tempered to a mere dislike). Thank goodness I am legally unfit for work because of my autism-spectrum condition, and live in a welfare state that pays my bills for that reason, so I have decided to use these regular payments as a scholarship to start a take on the fine arts. I am working on a solarpunk Gesamtkunstwerk my conlangs are a part of. Faced with the decision between wealth and freedom, I chose freedom, and am happy with that.

I on the other hand love the thrill of hunting the cause of the next bug and ultimately fixing that bug in addition to merely designing and building software. I get bored, and dissatisfied with being bored, if I have no challenges before me. Yes, hunting and fixing that bug may be utterly unscientific, but that makes it no less attractive. In cases like my floating-point conversion functions, just figuring out how to achieve what I seek, even if it is by trial and error, is enjoyable in and of itself on top of actually achieving it. (Things that are too easy to figure out are less attractive in a way, in that they don't present sufficient challenge for me.)

Fair. I know the pleasure of finding out something; I often experience this with my conlangs and also with my researches into prehistoric languages (which in turn feed into my conlang projects). But debugging felt to me like climbing a slope whose top is forever hidden in mist, such that it seems to me to extend infinitely and there was no top to reach at all. I mean, when you are hunting a bug, you don't know whether your program will work when you have fixed it, or it will only reveal the next of an unknown number of further bugs. Different people experience things differently. There are people who experience a pleasant thrill in a bungee jump, a splatter film, or a death metal concert. To me, such things are just meaninglessly horrifying, and I feel no desire experiencing them.

As for Windows and Microsoft, I have never been a Windows user outside work, and have never been and never will be at home with Windows. (My personal laptop does have Windows installed alongside Linux, as it came with Windows, but I have only used Windows on it to confirm that certain things would work under Windows. Also, my actual work at my day job is all under Linux or WSL2, and I largely use Windows for Office and the web.) My family's first computer was an Apple //e, and after that a number of Macs. I have been a Linux user since high school, when I bought an external hard drive for the family Mac with money I had earned (as my parents wouldn't allow me to wipe the internal hard drive) and installed LinuxPPC on it. Since getting my first PC of my own shortly before going off to college I have consistently run Debian GNU/Linux on my own machines to this very day.

Yes - I still dislike Microsoft and the way they shamelessly exploit their near-monopoly by capitalizing on bugs (willfully selling flawed software such that people will buy the next version in hope that the bugs will be fixed), and feel that Linux is the better OS, and I have been using Linux consistently at home for about 30 years.

(Yes, I host my software on GitHub, which is owned by Microsoft, but that is largely because it has by far the largest userbase of the source code hosting sites today. I did use SourceForge in the past, but over the years SourceForge has done some rather questionable stuff such as bundling junkware with one's own code, more questionable than anything GitHub has actually done, which has made me question the wisdom of using it.)

I understand. For a while, I tried to use Ecosia (an alternative search engine promising to invest their returns in reforestation), but found that their search results were much worse than Google's, so I returned to using Google. (Also, the fact that Ecosia uses Microsoft's Bing engine did not exactly make it more likeable to me.) It is nice for a company to invest in improving our environment, but that is no excuse for offering shoddy products.

Unrelated question: does anyone know if there's any way to call up random Wikipedia pages?

Raphael wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2024 3:36 pm Unrelated question: does anyone know if there's any way to call up random Wikipedia pages?

Hamburger menu (to the left of the Wikipedia logo, top left of page); Random article.

zompist wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2024 3:47 pm

Raphael wrote: ↑Sat Oct 12, 2024 3:36 pm Unrelated question: does anyone know if there's any way to call up random Wikipedia pages?

Hamburger menu (to the left of the Wikipedia logo, top left of page); Random article.

Oh, thank you!

Raphael wrote: ↑Fri Oct 11, 2024 1:54 pm OK, I'll speak as a grumpy old Millennial who grew up in a time before influencers now: Back then, of course we had celebrities who got paid to sell stuff, but I don't think there were many celebrities whose entire celebrity status was based on them selling stuff (unless you count corporate mascots as celebrities). Do I get this right that that's what today's influencers are?

sure we had, celebrities famous for being famous is as old as me, at least... people like tila tequila, the kardashians or kardi b. I can't remember any dudes off the top o my head, but i'm sure there are some. a lot of influencers are quite vapid, yes, but a lot of em (depending on how lato sensu we use influencer) consistently produce interesting and well thought out stuff.

People who were famous for being famous? Sure. People who were mainly famous for selling stuff? Less sure.

Raphael wrote: ↑Sun Oct 13, 2024 7:07 am People who were famous for being famous? Sure. People who were mainly famous for selling stuff? Less sure.

There are a lot of nuances, but publicity is at least a few centuries old, and some people have probably always been better at it than they are at their actual work if any. The thing is, if that fit someone in the 1920s or 1890s, would they be remembered today?

There's been an actor > salesperson track for decades, and surely some of them were more famous in the latter role. I'd suggest Betty Furness, who had a busy but not very memorable career as a movie actress in the 1930s, then became much better known (and paid) doing ads for Westinghouse in the 50s.

FWIW, I don't think "influencer" just means someone who touts brands for money— it evolved out of content creators for fashion, makeup, etc. who perhaps honestly reviewed products. There's still some fig leaf, that the content creator is providing entertainment, not ads.

also, aren't influencers selling things as a result of them being famous in the first place? plus, there's that guy from the infomercials who's famous for slapping a watertank to sell you some duct tape. or maybe I don't get what you mean after all...

1) Can you talk with tubes in your nose?

2) If the answer is "yes", how would the voice/accent of someone talking with tubes in their noses sound different?

Raphael wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 6:22 am 1) Can you talk with tubes in your nose?

2) If the answer is "yes", how would the voice/accent of someone talking with tubes in their noses sound different?

Like NG tubes? I believe you can talk, though no idea how it'd sound. I'd expect it'd sound like someone with a very heavy cold?

Ares Land wrote: ↑Thu Oct 17, 2024 5:02 am

Raphael wrote: ↑Wed Oct 16, 2024 6:22 am 1) Can you talk with tubes in your nose?

2) If the answer is "yes", how would the voice/accent of someone talking with tubes in their noses sound different?

Like NG tubes? I believe you can talk, though no idea how it'd sound. I'd expect it'd sound like someone with a very heavy cold?

Thank you. Anyone else?

*********************************



Unrelated question: I'm currently trying to figure out the Islamic holidays during the Islamic month of Dhu al-Hijjah. Of course those include Eid al-Adha, which is, of course, very important, but Wikipedia makes it seem as if there are a whole lot more important dates in that month. I'm mainly interested in the question of which of these days a pious Muslim would usually take off work, and Wikipedia doesn't seem to say much about that.

I am glad I left this site years ago and am ashamed I have never been banned. Not surprised to see it become an antisemitic cesspool, but am surprised to see the degree to which zompist and linguoboy outright support and encourage it - until late 2023 I have always thought them to be wonderful people. Having my old mèþru identity recorded for posterity as the one who started so many of the daily used threads here fills me revulsion, both from the dysphoria of having abandoned that name and associating it with dark times of my life and what this place has become.

Signed a proud Israeli secular Jew. A left-winger, someone nonbinary and disabled who has found every hobby sphere, every political space, every LGBT alliance I used to participate in to champion the attempted genocide of my people. Am Yisrael Chai motherfuckers.

I thought users and their posting histories have been deleted entirely from this forum before? (Or am I confusing my vile haunts?) Could this be done on your own request?