That would be quite a feat, given that Mr. Carnegie was born in the 1800's and died over 70 years ago.
I'm convinced that 99% of the people who criticize or even just talk about that book have never actually read it, and have zero idea what they're talking about. It's just in that Ayn Rand bucket of books that people talk about, because they see other people getting likes and upvotes for it.
It's not about helping. It's about the feeling of clout. There are still plenty of people who look at Github profile activity to judge job candiates, etc. What gets measured gets repeated.
I believe that most of the ills of social media would disappear, if we eliminated the "like" and "upvotes" buttons and the view counts. Most open source garbage pull requests may likewise go away if contributions were somehow anonymous.
While I personally agree that claiming any European identity label from 400+ years ago is silly, I disagree that there's any winning move other than ignoring the slacktivist noise. The people telling you that your natural identity labels are "polluted" will never be satisfied with any amount of "fighting" (i.e. arguing on social media). Because their own identity is that too wrapped up in that.
Also, in this particular instance, arguing both that "Viking" is an imaginary identity that no one really has today, AND that it's being stolen from someone else and erased, is absurd. Other Nordic commenters here have discussed contexts in which the term "Viking" is used today, and it sounds like the same semi-cheeky spirit that everyone else says it.
You will always find plenty of buyers on HN and Reddit for general anti-US sentiment. But probably fewer takers for the unjust oppression of northern European white dudes.
1. People yearn for identity labels. It's a core part of human existance.
2. "White" and "American" are problematic identity labels. People therefore often reach back toward European ancestry (real or supposed), for identity labels that are less controversial.
3. The average person isn't aware (or concerned) that "Viking" isn't strictly an ethnicity. Because it's nevertheless a commonly used identity label.
Not everything has to be an opportunity to spot Nazis hiding behind every tree, or showcase your pedant chops. People wear shamrock jewelry or put an Italian flag bumper sticker on their car because it's fun and feels good, simple as that. Only a small number of legit white supremacists, and a legion of absolutely insufferable Internet progressives, think about this all that deeply.
I was involved in a UU church for a few years. It's a weird organization, and very unstable, with another revolution sweeping in new leadership (and completely new culture) every 5 to 10 years.
When I first started going, it was VERY open to atheists and secular humanists. New leadership sweeps in, and there's a mandate to focus more on "worship" and other religious jargon... and let the atheists know that while they can be fellow travelers on some of the social justice stuff, they're not really in the fold.
Last I heard, that leadership wave had themselves been swept out under controversial circumstances. But by then I was long gone.
I could never really get a straight answer on WHAT we were supposed to be "worshipping", given that UU's don't profess faith in any any particular deity or pantheistic concept, etc. I finally reached the conclusion that we were supposed to just worship the leadership's political beliefs, and not think too much or ask questions. In fairness, maybe that DOES make it a real church?
Nonsense. It's fine to be boring, and to have boring friends. This expectation that you need to be travel influencer or a deep philosopher in order to have anything to talk about is an artifact of social media.
I'm old enough to remember what socialization was like pre-Internet. And by curated social media standards, it was really boring. It was also great.
That has never really been part of the definition. If you look at that Wikipedia article a couple comments up, I only see two examples (i.e. stoops and parks) that are free, and I think parks are a stretch because conversation is not a primary reason for most people going there.
This sounds like me always complaining about "Past Me"'s tech debt. Or when tech debt is being introduced, my team jokes about it being "Future Me"'s problem. It's good for a chuckle, but obviously there is continuity of identity.
But continuity is not immutability. Your actions are a present thing, and define you in the present. Past actions may have consequences, but you are always free to act differently now. Likewise, your present actions don't carve a future identity in stone, either. "The rent is due everyday", so to speak.
This never has anything to do with open source vs. closed source, or anything like that. It always has to do with prioritizing the cohort that's most likely to pay money.
It's been shown over and over again in A/B testing that Apple device users will pay higher prices for the same goods and services than non-Apple users will. They're more likely to pay, period, versus free-ride.
As an Android user, it frustrates me sometimes. But I understand. I'm far more frugal with my online spending than most of my Apple user friends, myself.
Of course it does. Do you think the elites actually WANT massive tariffs putting a brake on GDP growth? Why are tech companies suddenly reversing course on content moderation and/or DEI, after years of pushing in the opposite directions?
Private enterprise will always have some level of corrupting influence over government. And perhaps it sees current leadership as the lesser of two evils in the grand scheme. But make no mistake, government DOES ultimately have the power, when it chooses to assert itself and use it. It's just a matter of political will, which waxes and wanes.
Going back a century, did the British aristocracy WANT to be virtually taxed out of existence, and confined to the historical dustbin of "Downton Abbey"?
I only clicked this to see if Coolify could be a compelling option against my current setup, of using Docker Compose for everything on my VM (including a private Docker registry for my images, and a Traefik frontend proxy to route it all).
Zero actual mention of Coolify, and the manual steps to PREPARE for it seem far more complicated than, "Just base your VM on the Docker Compose base image, and then tweak a couple things".
I'll stick with what I have. Nice advantage is that I can migrate from host to host and 99% of it is just copying the Docker Compose YAML file.
Then what's the point of including it in dishes like paella, where any fragrance will be drowned out by all of the other spices and flavors in the dish?
Does EVERY desktop application really need to run on mobile? Some apps are just... call me crazy... desktop apps! (NOTE: "native vs. browser-based" is separate distinction from "desktop vs. mobile".)
That's not to say that there can't be mobile audio apps, or mobile whatever. I just think that's a separate app, and should be designed and written as a mobile app from conception.
I realize that a large cohort finds desktop applications uncool today, but I'm just so frustrated with the idea that serious and powerful desktop interfaces need to crippled in order to fit into a "mobile-first" (a.k.a. "lowest-common denominator") paradigm. For audio listening, that's fine. But for serious audio creation and editing? FUCK an iPhone, sheesh.
Is this at the "Chrome" level, or baked in at the "Chromuim" level? And therefore also an issue for Brave, Opera, Vivaldi, new-Edge, and anything else jumping on the browser engine monoculture?
Perl 5 was released in 1994. At this point, the "5" isn't really a version number anymore. It's just part of the name.
If you did a "major version bump" from here, you'd probably have to bring the "5" along for the ride. Like Java version 2, where you had J2EE version <X> for years.
In reality, there probably never will be another major version bump of Perl 5, in the marketing sense. The minor version number is really the major version number now.
I'm convinced that 99% of the people who criticize or even just talk about that book have never actually read it, and have zero idea what they're talking about. It's just in that Ayn Rand bucket of books that people talk about, because they see other people getting likes and upvotes for it.