> Companies expect you to learn the ropes elsewhere and only show up when you're experienced.
This is every industry - barring unionized trades with established apprenticeship pathways - over the past few decades. Either someone does the early-career job-hop dance, or they take on student loans to (maybe!) skip some of that. (And, you know, universities would prefer not actually to train anyone, either. If they can - "highly selectively" - find cohorts who don't need much mentorship then that's much better for their bottom lines.) Regardless, the entire cost and risk of training has been pushed onto individual employees.
Yes, this works well for a small minority of highly-motivated people - who are, of course, vastly over-represented on this board, so few here will object to it - but it prevents far, far more people from ever reaching their potential.
I agree. To expand your point a bit, it seems to me that for any civilization to get to the point of developing AI it needs a resource distribution mechanism at least as efficient as capitalism. It's not impossible to imagine an alien species with different biological imperatives than our own - a hive-mind, for instance - which could achieve that, and thus take a very different path and attitude towards AI. They'd be be very different from us, though.
> Who was ever writing on the back of cigarette packs?
British officers planning trench raids in the front lines during WWI. Or, at least, that's where I've been told the expression originates.
Really, though, is it impossible to imagine no one, ever, using a cigarette pack to jot something down? It's a colloquialism. It doesn't even have to be taken literally to make sense. What is gained by questioning it on that level?
Ding ding ding! Here is a photo of a cigarette packet included in a Christmas box sent to every BEF (British Expeditionary Force) soldier in France in 1914. You can see that the back offers quite a lot of room for writing:
That Christmas box itself, by the way, is beautiful. Brass, with an embossed portrait of Princess Mary, and scrollwork on the cover. My former father-in-law had one, that had been brought back by his father from France - missing, ironically enough in the context of this conversation, only the cigarettes, which he didn't smoke, but used in trade.
> Really, though, is it impossible to imagine no one, ever, using a cigarette pack to jot something down? It's a colloquialism. It doesn't even have to be taken literally to make sense. What is gained by questioning it on that level?
I took the OP's question to really be a question about the origin of that phrase, and with your answer, I learned something I didn't know before. So I, for one, am happy the question was asked.
napkins, and envelopes at least kind of make sense.
Who was ever writing on the back of cigarette packs?
---
Implication being that writing on the back of cig packs does not make sense. I'd agree with your reading if not for the "at least kind of make sense" bit.
My father taught me times tables, each one written on the back of a fag packet, in 1972. And we used matches for addition and multiplication before that.
All of that, and more broadly because FOSS developers are horrible about accepting advice or feedback from non-engineers, like designers or "normie" users. (Naturally speaking in broad terms, here; I'm sure some are great.) I can think of three or four (otherwise excellent projects) I've used where a "please put that CLI-only utility everyone uses all the time into the GUI" PR or Issue gets repeatedly closed. Or where making the rudimentary GUI look just a bit nicer would attract an order of magnitude more users. I think some developers really don't want to make things for non-developers. I get that, to a certain extent - support gets way, way harder, for instance - but then there really isn't much ground for complaining about FOSS's limited reach.
Unless they've recently changed the deal, they'll be selling GOS out of the box. That was the announcement two or so years ago, and so far as I know nothing had changed.
That was not the announcement. This was never stated anywhere. Motorola is making a subset of future devices meet the GrapheneOS hardware security requirements, greenboot and preinstalled options are not confirmed, and may not happen at all for the first few devices.
The problem happened during the formation lap. They red-flagged the race and brought all the cars off the track. I don't know any more about the update mechanism than you do, but GP's theory is plausible.
Huge mistake! I loved Wave, and used it very successfully on one creative project. When I tried again, with some of the same people, we'd collectively burned all of our invite tokens and couldn't get any more, so we had to revert to emailing things back and forth so the new folks weren't kept out of the loop. That killed it, as far as any of us were concerned. I think I used it one more time, to plan a party or something with my sister, and never again. Integrating it into Gmail, as you suggest, would have been a better path, but hardly necessary. It was great as a stand-alone product, but destroyed itself because the damn invite system stopped the network effect cold.
I have yet to replace any of the LED bulbs I bought at Costco in 2013. I dunno who manufactured them, or what kind of unobtainium they're made from, or whether I will jinx them by talking about it, but they just... Keep on going. Basic Edison screw-ins, from the first generation of bulbs that emitted warm light, that I've used exactly as I would any light-bulb. They weren't really expensive - maybe $2-3 apiece, though I really don't remember - and, I dunno. I hear everyone constantly complaining about their LED bulbs, and maybe they've been enshittified since, but I have absolutely no complaints.
Yeah, but that's what makes it such a good game, in my opinion. Ten or so years ago I played a lot with / against two friends. With other "deep"(-ish) games someone who's never played before never has even a remote chance against experienced players - we had other games we'd never pull out with a n00b at the table - but with Dominion you can give them that strategy, plus a few tips, like "trashing cards is really helpful", and they know enough to hang. They'll lose, mostly, but they won't be immediately crushed, and they'll want to play again.
Anyway, the main fun is trying to get an approach working with unfamiliar card combinations - and yes, we owned all the expansions, thank you for asking. :-)
There's a level of play in Dominion where it feels like there's two turns. One starts before the first card is played where you devise a strategy given the board. The second is just playing it out. Dominion leaves very little room for strategy switching - if you devise a second rate strategy, there's no realistic way to catch up. Very little of a player's choices depend on the actions opponents have taken. Short of a stack running out, curses, and a few others, you're mostly playing solo. That lack of being able to adapt is why I can't, even after hundreds of games, I can't bring myself to play it anymore.
That's a fair point. Fortunately, most games are short enough that you don't lose a lot of time when that happens. Mostly, though, I see a way I could have tweaked my card mix a bit to have made it work, so I want to play the same board again.
But, sure, if you're looking for a game with a lot of player interaction then Dominion isn't for you.
This is every industry - barring unionized trades with established apprenticeship pathways - over the past few decades. Either someone does the early-career job-hop dance, or they take on student loans to (maybe!) skip some of that. (And, you know, universities would prefer not actually to train anyone, either. If they can - "highly selectively" - find cohorts who don't need much mentorship then that's much better for their bottom lines.) Regardless, the entire cost and risk of training has been pushed onto individual employees.
Yes, this works well for a small minority of highly-motivated people - who are, of course, vastly over-represented on this board, so few here will object to it - but it prevents far, far more people from ever reaching their potential.
reply