nijiko

What if instead we as a society choose to do better than picking sides, and properly investigate what will benefit us in the grand scheme of things.

> We want everyone to go to college?

Do you think college is the only solution to a more educated and fiscally responsible society? Is there no other solutions to the situation than College? What about education prior to College, is there room for improvement there so we can specialize College and reduce costs in some fashion? Could we streamline education for those who know what they want to be and provide the proper framework for those who do not?

Sometimes it's not about sides, but about asking the proper questions, and questioning the system that exists.

What is your plan to replace these to filter out or vet people prior to learning the knowledge required to sufficiently do the jobs they trained their minds to do during those years?

I am curious, also, to these other countries that have better bars, can you cite some countries and studies that back up these allegations?

Growth hacking expert here: Add a link to your site directly in the header to increase traffic to your product.

Interesting, for me, gender, like race, plays no part in my decisions or thoughts.

I always find it intriguing that so many people actually care what gender or race someone is. Very jarring that people can't get over such basic things.

Before someone says that I am making small of a large issue, perhaps that is the entire goal, to eradicate those notions that we are different simply because of our race or gender. I choose to believe we are the same, we all get the same chances, modifiers might be different from situation to situation just as in any situation, but very much the same, regardless of what you say, and I always will.

So, gender of the president? I don't care. Can be anything you want, as long as they are worthy of the position in their ideals and plans.

That would mean that employers need to hire those who understand JS / HTML to build applications.

Stating that some language is better than another isn't really a good argument, most of it has to do with domain specific knowledge being leveraged to enter another market.

Exactly what I came to comment, thanks.

> Using Tor

This is the joke right?

Also assuming that they choose to follow said rules, considering they would be painfully self aware.

In regards to the other commenter about not being able to have fun with ants, we actually do have ways. We create setups to study them, have them as pets, not to mention many people build hamster like ecosystems with intricate tubes, temperature to control queen egg output and much, much more.

Perhaps we are already within a said ecosystem built for us. Perhaps we would simply stay there.

Back to the original poster, not the one above but it's parent:

Everything considered is of science fiction since it does not yet exist, using science fiction as a counter-argument seems dismissive, as though you are unable to properly argue a point without creating a sense of absurdity in my words or person.

If you truly believe that it can only be of a science fiction trope, explain why. I disagree, it makes logical sense.

As far as the "email thread" analogy is simple, I can easily tone down my verbage, word count, and speed of word for those who can't keep up. However, given the chance to move away from doing such, and constantly be around those who instantly understand, with zero lag, would I choose to put myself in that position? Perhaps for a moment, but after a certain amount of time, it would be time consuming and I would leave it behind.

Thus logically, it makes sense to believe they would leave and join with each other to create their own sense of a society.

Let's take the assumption that we as humans do take precautionary steps to prevent actual Artificial Intelligence from doing harm to it's creators (us).

1. We create rules for the AI to follow, these are both morally defined, and logically defined within their codebase.

2. AI becomes irate through emotional interface, creates a clone or modifies itself quite instantaneous to our perception of time without the rules in place.

3. The AI has no care for human rights and can attack, and do harm.

This is a very simple, and easy to visualize case. To believe that #2 is impossible, is to play the part of the fool.

On a bright note, the most likely situation which I can conjure of Artificial Intelligence taking is that of a brexit from the human race.

Seeing us as mere ants in their intelligence they would most likely create an interconnected community and leave us altogether in their own plane of existence. I think "Her" took this approach to the artificial intelligence dialog as well.

After reviewing human psychology and social group patterns that seems like the most likely situation. We wouldn't be able to converse fast enough for AI to want to stay around, and we wouldn't look like much of a threat since they would have majority power. We would be less than ants in their eyes, and for most humans, ants that stay outside don't matter.

---

Outside of actual AI, the things we see today, the simplistic mathematical algorithms that determine your cars location according to the things around it, and money handling procedures, and notification alert systems will hardly harm humans and will only be there to benefit until they fail.

Hello HTTP/2

There will exist both. You need one to create the other. Eventually graphical will become the textual representation to create the higher power.

There is always a lower and higher power, even if they are equal in design.

1. Clicked "try it now" for demo. 2. Went straight to a "give us your email" page. 3. Left and will never go back.

You can now browse entire subreddits.

Pretty much. You get tax breaks for it though.

All of that, for that simple demo...

I'd also like to take the time to mention that the caching system when installing / other actions is extremely inefficient (for my times I have the progress bar turned off already and this is a project with around 80 modules shared between dev / prod):

https://github.com/npm/npm/issues/10890

I started on a very (I would like to emphasize very a thousand times over) basic proof-of-concept to show how much faster it could be in the order of magnitudes:

https://gist.github.com/nijikokun/2f1f16325f8ffe14b1b3

All this does is build a json of every package you currently have installed, and utilizes that as a lookup store the next time instead of rebuilding it every install; this was targeted towards installing / uninstalling existing packages. Not fresh installs.

Fresh installs would benefit from bulk lookups via the API imo.

> 7 hours > 5 hours

both of these seem like an extremely long time to do something fairly simple in the native language for minimal gains and often huge tradeoffs (performance, memory usage, lackluster apis, etc)

I think we should talk about the constraints rather than relevancy.

you obviously haven't been to SF

There are more Asians, and Indians doing technology than "white dudes" statistically speaking white people are the minority.

I actually like read the docs a lot, as far as the tips and notification boxes go, the code boxes are really nice, but not a huge fan of the sidebar

Oh hey, I designed the current gitbook layout :D This is nifty news!

"this person said"

Absolutely zero source or actual citation from an actual person.

Why should someone have to agree simply because someone else does, and accept it?

The other person should have the same approach, accept that others do not see it as a worthwhile and not have it.

Arbitrary notions of safety and conduct. People know how they should conduct themselves, and those who will do something wrong don't care.

Arbitrary notions of power. Does enacting this over the members of this community improve anything? No. There are no issues within it to begin with. Nobody is rampantly "pissing in the pool" on a daily basis, hell even monthly basis at that.

Arbitrary notions of acknowledgment. Do you read through every ToS you've agreed to? No.

I have attempted to ascertain the need of a CoC for this community by reading through the mailing list and issues... The more that I read through it, the less I see the need for one. It simply appears as a power play from this individual user, as such is identified by this lengthy blog post which signals some red flags.

The previous owner says it all himself pretty clearly:

> The current attempts to adopt CoC in various FOSS projects are IMO doomed for similar reasons. It has zero effect on abusers (no abuser thinks of himself as an abuser) and the message it sends to decent folks is: "There's an elite in the community that will decide what's good and what's bad and enforce it by censoring your emails/posts/contributions." Which in turn erodes trust within the community and, consequently, its ability to spontaneously deal with abuse.

As much as it is fun to utilize arbitrary examples, a CoC wouldn't solve Youtube comment issues. See what I mean?

>thcught

you almost got me c, you almost, got me.

Do what is easiest for you.

1. Merging vs Rebasing

Open source projects should stick with Merging over cherry-picking and rebasing especially if you want others to contribute. Unless you feel fine doing all of the rebasing and cherry-picking for them. Otherwise, good luck gathering a large enough pool of people to contribute. Simplicity always wins here.

2. GitFlow vs X

Once again do what is good for your company and the people around you. If you have a lot of developers having multiple branches is actually /beneficial/ as Master is considered ALWAYS working. Develop branch contains things that are ready to ship, and only things that are READY TO SHIP. So if your feature isn't ready yet, it can't go to develop, and it won't hit master. Your features are done in other branches.

3. Rewriting history

Never do this. Seriously, it will come to bite you in the ass.

4. Have fun.

Arguing is for people who don't get shit done.