I'm sure hundreds of women won't go into STEM, now that this one new language has a picture of a ballerina with batteries giving a massage to some dude with a laptop.
Maybe they should illustrate her putting batteries in a vibrator, so she can go fuck herself, just like you should.
No. Women are a more valuable resource and hence had to be protected.
If most men die, we can repopulate if there is a large population that is able to birth young. If most women die, resources are diminished because of time consideration.
Men go to war because they’re expandable. Why are you bringing in gender norms into the equation?
When he distributed the content he didn't pick only the rational ones. Many people did exactly that, joining ISIS, traveling to Syria, doing terrorist attacks in their own countries.
They didn't get the ideas to do that out of the blue, without seeing or hearing any of the propaganda content.
I genuinely haven't heard of 13 of those and I'd say I'm quite interested in learning about languages. The few that I know, were just briefly mentioned by a professor, so I don't know anything apart from the name.
What qualifies as prominent to you? How old are you? On Tiobe Index only Pascal and Go are in the first 50, while half of them aren't even listed in the first 100. Sure they're important and had an impact on new languages, but most of them were made ~50 years ago.
So many new languages were developed since then, which are far more useful and prominent than these legacy ones. If almost none of the modern ones have implemented it so far, is it really that useful/needed?
>I genuinely haven't heard of at least a third of them and I'd say I'm quite interested in trying new (and possibly unusual) languages.
But perhaps not as interested in trying old and significant languages?
>What qualifies as prominent to you? On Tiobe Index only Pascal and Go are in the first 50, while half of them aren't even listed in the first 100. Sure they're important and had an impact on new languages, but most of them were made ~50 years ago.
Well, Lisp was made 60+ years ago, and C 50 years ago, so?
Besides Go, Smalltalk, Ada, and Pascal would be significant languages in any book, and I'd add Simula, Oberon, Eiffel, and Dylan to the list.
Seriously, if one haven't at least heard of Simula (the father language of OO) I'm not sure how qualified they are to pass PL judgement.
>Well, Lisp was made 60+ years ago, and C 50 years ago, so?
Well, they're still seeing widespread use, that's why they're on Tiobe, while others faded into obscurity. Those languages are historically significant, but nowadays they're basically useless apart from scientific use and maintaning old software.
Maybe you should understand that the majority of programmers are younger than Python and don't study the same material they did 30 years ago, because a whole lot of history happened in that time. Also I'm not sure how not knowing about Simula makes me unqualified for anything.
I've noticed, not just in this reply, but in all of your comments; your condescending tone and indirect addressing make you seem like an unpleasant person.
Using these qualities makes one seem like some stuck-up pseudointellectual boomer.
I really don't understand the morality of an average HN user.
There was a post a few days ago about Spotifree (which mutes your ads), and everyone took it as a personal offense, every possible negative word was said about the person who made it, and the people that use it are lowlives who don't deserve anything in life if they won't cough up $10.
But now when it's Amazon losing thousands of dollars per product, it's okay because stealing from someone rich is acceptable and they should just eat their losses and move on. Do you understand that if you scale Amazon down to Spotifies size, their losses are way heftier?
I've also learned that stealing is justified if it's a machine error. So by that logic, if the receipt machine malfunctions in a store and prints out some large number, you would pay it?
There is no "average HN user." Some people on HN hate ads, and some people on HN write ad software for a living. Some people on HN own a business and sympathize with Amazon over lost profits. Others can't afford nice camera equipment and (maybe) would prefer a society where wealth is more evenly distributed.
I personally think that this is moral. I think that capitalism is inherently immoral so it's not immoral to "steal" from giant corporations. I consider myself a very moral person (you have to take morality very seriously if you disagree with the people around you about moral issues) but this doesn't bother me.
Stealing from corporations is stealing from people. Otherwise, I could justify stealing hubcaps from your car as stealing from the car, not you, so it's ok.
Besides, if you have a moral code that specifies who it is ok to steal from, you'll need to accept another's moral code that says it's ok to steal from you.
This is obviously false if you think about it for like a minute.
> Stealing from corporations is stealing from people.
Sure, whatever. It's still not immoral. I also think it's okay to steal slaves from plantations. "But stealing from plantations is stealing from people!" Sure, whatever, it's still not immoral.
> Besides, if you have a moral code that specifies who it is ok to steal from, you'll need to accept another's moral code that says it's ok to steal from you.
Total non-sequitur. Let's try this: Marxists think that capitalism is stealing from workers. You think that it's moral. Therefore, if you have a moral code that says that it's okay to steal from workers, you'll need to accept another's moral code that says it's okay to steal from you. Makes sense, right? No.
It's awfully coincidental that your concept of legitimate ownership just so happens to align with the concept given to your by legal and cultural authorities. It's almost like you haven't actually bothered to think about it for yourself. Can you give me an example of a kind of ownership that you think is illegitimate?
But you're talking about one-time purchases, which is common for apps, but not so much for games. But even in apps you have monthly subscriptions that still somewhat skew the way you perceive the price. What's the max IAP profit for Netflix or Spotify? (Subscriptions bought through the app still net a cut to the store provider.)
Virtual currencies are a scam on its own, but even games without them can be exploitative. The monetization of games has become so frequent, that's it's basically accepted as something ordinary. I've noticed that some developers don't even bother creating a currency anymore, you just get the Playstore € prompt for the item you want to buy.
Most free games are built on the premise that it's never-ending or always expanding. Either you can upgrade to infinity or keep playing, because they keep adding new content. I don't think I've ever stumbled upon a game where you have limited things to buy.
The only solution I see, which is just plain unrealistic, is to put IAP apps into a seperate category. I've started doing this, by not downloading apps that have the "Includes IAP" and I'm pretty satisfied. I don't think any game/app should be qualified as FREE, if half of it is locked behind a paywall.
Everyone in the comments is acting like you're comitting a war crime, but the majority sees no problem with adblockers, which are pretty similiar, especially autoclicking ones.
The only one directly losing resources is the ad company, until they get tired of it and stop advertising on Spotify. But Spotify is affordable, so the amount of people that jump through hoops and use these methods is insignificant.
My guess is that you still benefit them more than people who share accounts.
> Everyone in the comments is acting like you're comitting a war crime, but the majority sees no problem with adblockers, which are pretty similiar, especially autoclicking ones.
They're not similar.
1) There is no paid alternative to ads I see in Firefox - eg., I can't pay to support the sites I consume, like I can with Spotify.
2) Spotify ads might track my music listening habits. Web ads track everything I visit in a web broswer.
3) Spotify ads do not attempt to exploit my browser privacy features to deanonymize me.
Maybe they should illustrate her putting batteries in a vibrator, so she can go fuck herself, just like you should.