I use my Macbook for things other than dev work, and that's where Linux tends to fall flat. Weird hardware incompatibilities, jank, huge amounts of time required to maintain the machine rather than just getting work done.
Having to occasionally run xattr -d com.apple.quarantine to download some random low-userbase FOSS app is nothing compared to what Linux users go through.
Honestly, I can't really imagine how this would work at all?
I could see how, given enough data, you'd be able to infer the intended logic of the server and reimplement something that's compatible (I've done this myself with Wireshark + USB devices in the past).
But how would could you reason about specific vulnerabilities in remote code just from a set of requests and responses?
I think a big part of this queasiness comes from the fact that a lot of the institutions we would put addicts and mentally ill people in really were nightmarish.
And ignoring the whole issue of the sanitariums being full of abuse, I don't think you can argue that sticking a drug addict in a regular prison full of criminals is good for them either.
Nah, I have girls and there's definitely a biological difference there even at a young age. They're much more sensitive to more subtle negative feedback in a way that boys just aren't.
I'm not saying boys should be beaten whenever they misbehave, but girls are definitely more tuned into the way they're being perceived by others.
With girls, you'll get the same corrective effect from an uncomfortable grimace as you would a wooden spoon.
I'll also add since this is about bullying, the type of bullying behaviours girls engage in is much less physical and a lot more underhanded. It's much harder to correctly identify who's the victim and who's the perpetrator.
We just have millenia of history, experience in every country and culture, and countless scientific papers on the matter, but please go on with your question...
While I hold the same conclusion as you, individuals chiming in to concur based on their own experience is nothing more than a way to validate what certain people of the time & place commonly believe to be true.
E.g. if people were apt to believe girls preferred green peppers more often than boys, there will always be plenty who say "Well, having both girls and boys, I can concur". It could be true, it could be false, or the cause could be something else. E.g., because people think there are certain differences it shapes differences in development which lead to some of them actually being more common for nothing more than the sum of environmental factors - even if those biases only started as misconceptions.
Whichever it actually is, there will usually be large segments of the populations who would observe it to be conflicting things from an individual at-home view and it takes a lot of work & really good data to be able to make a meaningful claim about what and why differences exist.
That is true philosophically but not in the case of AI. I use Claude heavily to write code. My mother in law uses it to query legal documents and standards. My wife uses it as a roided up Google.
The actual problem solving was trivial but I would spend days trying to work my way around some Qt work or guess the magic Cmake incantation.
reply