You tear yourself apart!

Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should!

I mean, I’m coming from a background sceptical of the law of attraction because it’s just repackaging having goals to sell self help books. How do you become a nuclear scientist? Step 1) step 2) step 3) etc.

The law of attraction is new speak used to sell known principles to people, in my opinion. Manifestation, in my opinion, is the same thing but coming at it from a crystals vibe rather than the self help vibe of the law of attraction.

I don’t mean to be a jerk about it, hence all the in my opinions, but as I said, I am very skeptical of the usage and utilization of the concept of manifestation.

All that said, you’re not wrong. The principle is valid and it does work, but it’s mustering the discipline to stick to those goals, that’s the secret that everyone is looking for. Idk I feel like I’m starting to ramble, do you have any points/counter points to any of this?

Oh yeah, I just wanted to complete the picture for those who might not be able to assume all the steps, it’s by no means a fault in anything you said. I’m just adding on because I don’t mind the low hanging fruit discussions, personally. By all means, feel free to skip it, that’s what people with interests like mine are here to fill for! Don’t waste your time being stuck in boring explanations on the internet when it’s virtually guaranteed someone else will think it’s fun!

How did they get mixed? I see 1 in arabic and 2 and 3 in Hindu. Is there a good place to start reading or watching about this in your opinion? If not, I’m just gonna YouTube the history of numbers and see where I land

That second one… Isn’t that manifestation? Hard agree with you there, usually people promoting manifestation are simultaneously saying “you can imagine anything and make it real” and in the same breath are trying to sell you something that you evidently aren’t able to imagine into your reality for free.

On the other side, technically, even breathing is enough to satisfy the goal of “changing the universe”. That bunch of molecules would not be moving through the universe like that if it weren’t for your consciousness (but few appreciate sentience at that atomic of a mechanical level lol. I just think it’s a massive glazed over step in going from mind to city/culture/science)

Now that’s a characterization I can get behind!

Ah I get that, like the frustration of a sociological paper pointing out a societal issue but offering no steps on how to solve it due to fixes being out of scope (utterly infuriating lol).

I still think the criticism is valid, but I do think I agree in that the criticism could be more constructive… But I still think laying the foundation of the argument, so to speak, is still constructive even though it may not go as far as one may need for it to cross the threshold back into polite…

I am still convinced this is a knee jerk feeling issue more than anything truly being amiss, but I have been wrong before. What do you think?

I agree it probably is a definitions thing, I’m very pedantic sometimes and it feels like my definition of constructive is much more optimistic/wider/encompassing than yours. That doesn’t mean that my definition is right or that your position is wrong though, that’s just what I think is going on here.

The first step to correction is understanding there is a problem in the first place. This is quite constructive, it may just not feel like it is because it’s framed combatively.

You’re doing it wrong is the phrase that lets teachers teach at one of the most basic levels.

The public is essentially a self teaching teacher, so this is just the process of public correction happening. It may look/feel like public shaming, and it may be if they’re going too far, but that is the mechanism that I think is playing out here.

Does that framing make it any more palatable to you or does it still seem unnecessarily disrespectful?

History is written by the victors, and that is what a win looks like… Not saying it’s deserved, just why that happened that way.

Tbh at this point I’m convinced articles like this are just life support trying to claw back as many Musk dick riders back into normies.

It’s good work, and I think it should be done, but yeah, this is exactly what a sane person would expect to see given all the context.

It’s not news to most, but to the audience that I think this sort of thing is going after, it genuinely might be news to them.

Not that this article alone would get anyone to drop their fanboy bs, but it seems like it’s intended to be a tool to facilitate that. As for why it’s here specifically in world news, probably in case anyone wants to use it as a facilitation tool for anyone in their lives. Can’t use what you don’t know exists and all that lol

Yeah, that makes total sense.

Most software engineers also have to actively maintain and add features to their finished project, and those aspects change a lot about how the problem can be approached.

I failed to take into account why might I have not been effected by tech debt despite occasionally creating it before commenting. Will have to make sure that filter gets a bit stronger lol

Ah yeah, that would be a worry, except I forgot to mention that most of the code I work on usually gets thrown away after like 6 months. Makes tech debt not have nearly as big of an impact on me.

We do have a longer lasting code base that the little widgets I make run off of. That has a much more strict requirements to ensure tech debt is not introduced specifically so we don’t end up in that sort of a position.

That said, and yet we couldn’t even keep it out of our own code base. So yeah, I think my original comment is just wrong because I forgot all the ways tech debt actually has effected me in the past and how my industry’s project cycle is so short term that i rarely have the opportunity to run into tech debt that I caused in a problematic way…

Fair point, I work in a consumer facing, fast turn around, short lived code project industry. Not a typical software project with long life cycles.

These practices would almost certainly bite my company in the ass if we had to maintain anything for longer than year.

Occasionally, we do have to support a client for multiple years, and everytime it’s a hilarious shit show trying to figure out how to keep all the project dependencies up to date. This is likely platform tech debt, and would be the beginning of the problem if we didn’t have the privilege of being able to start over from scratch code-wise for each client’s new order.

I guess I’m just in a lucky spot in the programmer pool where tech debt literally doesn’t hit me as hard as it usually does others, and I just couldn’t identify that before now lol

Instead of saying tech debt isn’t that bad, my tune will change to something else. Like I said, I was on a team at one point that had a worse than usual tech debt problem, and it was unworkably stressful to deal with. Im guessing that experience is more typical of being near tech debt than my other experiences.

Rarely have I ever actually had consequences for my sins, which tends to be why I don’t go back and fix them…

If tech debt weight is felt in any way, it tends to get fixed. If it’s not felt, it’s just incredibly easy to forget and disregard.

(This is mostly me not learning my lesson well enough from my time being on Tech Debt: The Team. I do try and figure out the correct way to do things, but at the end of the day, I get paid to do what the boss wants as cheaply as possible, not what’s right :/ money dgaf about best practices until someone gets sued for malpractice, but on that logic, maybe the tech debt piper just hasn’t returned for payment from me yet… Only time will tell)

I typically don’t know what I’m doing, so my favorite binding is :q!

That’s cool as heck! Thanks for the info!

This probably isn’t what happened to you, but my brain assumed the dark areas were the land masses for a good long while until I realized why it looked like a nonsense map lol

This sounds interesting as heck, what do you mean this map is a great illustration of the original meaning of the word?

For some reason I thought the word typhoon popped into vernacular around the 1940s, but I think that story might be made up now that I’m older and thinking about it.

If “woke” hadn’t become a political buzzword, would Elon have said what that refrain used to be? As in, would he also have said that atheists just replaced god with the worship of science? Absolute stupidity and smooth brainery regardless