SyrupThinker
For example, (software/e) fuses are a common thing spoken about in the context of Android custom roms and rooting, typically re rollbacks. The term is used as such in the XDA thread the article links to in the same paragraph.
"not getting the memo" and "something being the best television in years" are also two very common expressions. Both are used beyond literal notes or TV.
This blunt bashing of phrases makes me (and surely others) not want to share thoughts on the internet. Because apparently trying to not sound like a textbook, or in some cases even trying to write proper English, gets you labeled as LLM.
Does this really discourage the LLM-assisted writers more than those that would use these specific phrases naturally? I doubt it, the former will probably just obfuscate it.
That would be relevant, for example, when the company goes defunct, and no one else holds any usage rights for the work. Then you'd regain those usage rights.
That of course is iffy to make use of because you'd need to be sure that you are considered the exclusive author, and that no one else acquired these exclusive usage rights.
That's at least somewhat cheaper when it works.
Wouldn't this imply that "regular" users are running their OS and/or browser in a language they do not want to use for search? This seems unlikely to me, or is there some systematic reason that results in this being the case?
Just avoiding/fixing that would probably speed up a good chunk of my own queries.
> Group of employees eating at the office [...]
Plenty of employers in a wide variety of industries provide lunch to their employees. Sure, the general idea is less time-waste and vibes, but this is also done in places and industries with strict work time requirements. Plenty of people also just do not partake in such offers.
- Wall of keyboards
God forbid they have decorations, and I mean look at the gaudy colors in all those spaces. This should all be converted to black and white cubicles.
- An actual chalkboard
That one is not great if it is not recreational. Having a work space in the break-room is poor separation, and would in some legislations even be illegal.
- Show rack at the entrance [...] You know it's rank in there
This reads like living in a bubble. For some regions on this planet this is culturally considered normal, or even expected. And that without suffering from general "rankness" in such closed spaces. They could use more racks though.
You also forgot to bring up the phone boxes, which imply a loud open space office. So nobody could ever perform actual work there, and your superiors always breathe down your neck.
Maybe you should have just critiqued the 996 practice in general, instead of picking out things that do not necessarily imply such a practice. Verbally barfing on everyone that has some of these in place, but knows they do not actually work a 996.
Optional chaining was added in v14 (2020), and it sure looks like that is the issue here.
Ich and Chemie are pretty similarly pronounced (some people say either with a harder k sound, ik, "kehmee"). Chemie also derives from the Greek χύμεία, so it contains the Chi to make the comparison.
A similar case can also be made for Jesus Christus, I certainly think Christus' pronunciation starts like crust.
And hey, if you derive the Greek root for it, you get Χριστός, which starts with Chi again.
I think a better case can be made just arguing against mixing alphabets like this.
By similar logic supermarkets should not carry alcohol or tobacco, theaters cannot show 18+ movies (even non-explicit ones), and entire parts of some cities need to be redone because of their red-light districts, because there are some at central locations a kid could reasonably stumble into.
I think just restricting access to this stuff, being discreet about it, and maybe limiting advertisement, is enough. I've lived somewhere with a pretty plainly visible red-light district close to the central train station, yet most people don't even realize it is there. I'd hope something similar could be accomplished for Steam as well.
Finally, at the end of the day parents gotta parent.
I think, no, in a vacuum they are fine, at least up to where I got. But even a short thing can get annoying if you need to do it often enough, which is at least my problem, and apparently also that of other players that don't mind the difficulty.
I agree, unfortunately I'm not even grinding the boss, I am grinding the path to the boss.
> Learning to identify this as a sign to step away is a very good life skill.
Which is why I stopped playing the game instead of letting it waste my time, like many others :)
> Take a 15 min break, either go somewhere else in game or better still, in real life. It really makes a world of difference.
It it is not like I, or every other person struggling with playing the game, have been continuously doing the same boss, for extensively long game sessions. I only have 8 hours evenly spread across the last 5 days.
I've also explored up to Graymoor at this point and picked up a few of the upgrades there, I don't think that is actually the issue here.
Unfortunately basically every encounter up to this point has the same runback tedium to it. So unless one one-tries a boss, which at least did happen twice to me, there seems to be no real way to avoid this tedium because of progression locks.
For comparison, I've played Elden Ring and the DLC, I've never had this much frustration there, because for the most part the struggle was with the bosses, not the perceived busy work of getting to them.
But it doesn't really matter, a good chunk of the players seem to enjoy it, the game doesn't need to appeal to everyone.
At the surface I had a similar experience to what the author describes. The movement feels good to me (until it doesn't), the game is appealing in style and gameplay concept, and I die frequently.
But unlike them I dropped it after throwing myself at the exact boss they mention.
Not because I think the game is actually hard at this point (it seems quite early in the game), but because I don't think the game actually respects my time. Something they don't seem to have an issue with.
They mention that they died over 30 times to the boss, and how it never felt unfair to them. And while I do not fully share this sentiment, I do not actually mind that part either. The difficulty of learning a boss is part of the game.
What surprises me is the not really mentioned part, that these 30 deaths (if I were to take them) take up 1-2 hours of my time.
And you might be thinking, 2-4 minute boss fight? Seems reasonable? To which I say, this person focuses so much on movement and dying to random stage hazards because at least 70% of that total time is spent getting back to the boss to begin with, a 1-2 minute run of the same segment of game, each attempt!
That's right, I spend more time running to the boss, than actually fighting it, because it turns out that you make mistakes when you do something repeatedly, even if it is just getting to the boss. I wish I could learn the boss and "get gud", but the game just won't let me without wasting my time.
Part of that is a skill issue on my part of course, but for this very segment at least, you just start to see all the little hazards the devs have placed on the optimal path, to trip you up if you ever lose focus for a second. For a part of the game you have already done, and are not actually concerned with at that very moment.
At least for me this got tedious very quickly. And supposedly this actually gets worse in later parts of the game.
At some point you start to wonder, "is the game punishing me by making me traverse the game world before fighting the boss again?" And this thought starts to infect the regular gameplay, were you are supposed to willingly explore the game world, you know, the core of a Metroidvania.
At the end I just asked myself "why am I willingly playing a punishment?"
The author even seems to have vaguely similar thoughts here, they say themselves that they are sometimes not having fun with this core part of the game. Isn't that worrying from a game design perspective?
Anyway, I think that's enough ranting, sorry for not concluding this thought.
Although at that point I'm sure you, and any similar user, would not actually rely on ad-hoc advice like in this thread, and instead just evaluate what is needed.
As an aside, personally speaking, headscale solves basically none of my concerns associated with introducing more software, complexity and third parties (the maintainers) into my network setup. Less so because of paranoia towards the software/product itself, and more so because of the increased surface area to attack.
But I also think that anyone actually bothering to set headscale up probably falls into the aforementioned group of people that actually thinks about their requirements.
I've set up Wireguard on a VPS once six years ago, and nothing needed adjustment since. It is as easy as you make it out to be, and depending on the use case the firewall rules can also be simple.
If I need to add a new device, which is probably a rarity for the average user, and once a year for me, it takes two minutes to edit two files and restart a service.
I can see reasons why one would want to use Tailscale, especially in an organization. But just uncritically recommending it for home-lab like setups seems as harmful as pushing people to Cloudflare for everything.
The stories I hear from friends in HR, at varying company sizes, is the stuff of fiction. Apparently most people apply with utter trash, its no surprise they get filtered out if they can't even be bothered to present themselves properly.
At least at smaller companies, if you have something that actually looks like you tried, you immediately stand out. (After HR waded through all the bad ones)
We are also not talking about typos or gaps in the CV here, but things like: including everything expected in a CV, writing something even vaguely resembling a formal letter, or even, addressing the right company in it (bonus points if they are a direct competitor).
We have a "right to one's image", you generally can't distribute/publish photos with recognizable people without consent. Unless they're truly just "part of the landscape" (background randos), crowds at public events, or of legitimate news/artistic interest.
I'd expect a similar threshold to apply to this Danish solution.
> Starting August 1, 2025, we’re introducing a new pricing plan for Amazon Q Developer designed to make things simpler and more valuable for developers.
> Pro Tier: Expanded limits $19/mo. per user
> 1,000 agentic requests per month included (starting 8/1/2025)
- https://aws.amazon.com/q/developer/pricing/
Previously agentic use was apparently "free", but with a set deadline in June, so it seems like this was just for a testing phase?
Early on I've made the mistake of sharing my solutions with people I knew. Unfortunately they kept sharing the solution too, and so on.
Two times I was pulled into a profs office after the relevant lecture, to be questioned about it.
After it became clear that I was the author, and what happened, nothing ever came of it (for me).
Ironically both times the copiers supposedly failed to remove the git repo that was part of the handoff, so it was primarily about verifying I was the original author.
Lesson learned: "invisible" watermarks work, because people are generally lazy (also don't share graded work, just offer to help)
It fails to differentiate between JavaScript engines, a core language implementation, and runtimes, an engine plus the useful parts needed for writing software (os, event loop etc.).
It lists engines like boa, duktape or Hermes as if they are the same thing as Node, Deno or Bun, but at the same time doesn't even mention SpiderMonkey, V8 or JavaScriptCore, as if realizing they are not actually in the same class.
I guess the snark wouldn't work as well if a chunk of the list gets eliminated by thinking about it.