I see it more as being about acceptance. If your wife dies, at some point, you will have to accept that your wife died and move on. This doesn't mean that you are cold or insensitive to it, it just means that you have accepted and processed this sorrow fully and are now ready to move on.
Stoicism for me is about practicing a sort of pre-acceptance of such things. To understand that everything bad that can happen eventually will happen (if you live long enough) and to accept it even before it has happened.
I like to think of it as that; you should have principles, such as trying to write DRY code, but any principle taken too far will end up being a bad thing. Don't be an extremist. Practice a sensible balance in everything you do.
This goes beyond programming as well, I think it goes for most things in life.
I think it's such a huge topic that it's really hard to summarize on an online message board, but in very broad terms I think you could say that the feeling I have is that there used to be a social contract between men and women where men were supposed to be A, B, and C, and women were supposed to be X, Y and Z. But now it seems that only men are still expected to be A, B and C - plus maybe D, while women are instead 'free' to be whatever they want. So you still have to be a 'real man', but she doesn't have to be a 'proper woman'.
The weird thing is that I'm not really pro gender roles, I'm much more pro individual freedom, so I hate being the one to make this argument. But I do think that there will always be some differences between men and women, and I think we are hurting ourselves a lot as a society by refusing to acknowledge that.
I think men are checking out of relationships because they feel they do not benefit them anymore. Not out of malice or even spitefulness (although there is some of that among some groups), but rather because so many things in our culture and society has been subtly altered to benefit women more and more over several decades to the point that men feel like getting into a relationship, or just investing in a woman at all, is a great way of getting screwed over, and I think there's something to that.
We need deep diving investigations to figure out the exact mechanics of it.
I feel like the term "alpha" is deeply problematic since different people use it to mean completely different things.
Many people associate it with the toxic traits of dominating others through aggression. While other's use it to reference a healthy, good, strong, well developed and balanced individual who helps others.
I think we need new terms for these things so we can start differentiate them.
Depends on how you look at games as a form of entertainment.
If you see them as long term investments that you intend to give hundreds or thousands of hours of your time, then yes I agree with your stance.
But if you see games more like an expendable medium that gives you a couple of hours of entertainment before they grow stale, like watching a movie, then it's a different thing.
I don't know much about codecs, but why isn't the music separated its own audio track so one can turn it on/off themselves in the browser? I'm guessing the current codecs being used doesn't support it, but couldn't/shouldn't it?
Morbid can be good. I feel like more parents need to remind their kids of death now and then. I know that sounds crazy, but I really think that a healthy knowledge and acceptance of death is a big part of what makes a well developed and healthy person.
As tragic as this is. I think they should plant a new tree in the same location.
I know it won't be the same, it won't heal the wound, at least not for hundreds of years, if ever. But it's just how society and the world is. Great things are made and appreciated, treasured even, and endure for a while, then they are broken by something, one way or another. And you can't undo that damage, but you can start over and build again. And that's all you can ever do. And although it may not seem like much now, there can perhaps still be greatness in the future again if we start to build it now. That greatness may not be exactly the same as the greatness of old, but it can be great in its own way.
Plus all news are biased one way or another nowadays. It doesn't matter if you're left or right, the news you're getting is spun in a certain way to push whatever narrative your particular media outlet wants to push.
This, in combination with their incentive to make everything seem like a huge problem that might lead to the end of the world, is a pretty toxic combination.
Completely agree, it has always bothered me as well. To me it (strongly) implies rushing, and I don't believe that constantly keeping your team in a stressful state where you are always rushing or 'sprinting' towards the next goal is a good sustainable long-term strategy.
For me, things like coding is only interesting in the context of being useful as a tool to do cool stuff.
I understand that some people like coding in itself, for the intellectual stimulation, but for me it's just a means to an end. I don't like coding, but I love building cool stuff, and coding lets me do that.
I largely agree, but the one thing I have been wanting to do sometimes is too be able to put marks/indicators on the scrollbar of where important pieces of information is in the flow.
A lot like chrome does when you use ctrl+f to search for a word.
The author claims that people's offering of help is not true help since it's for selfish reasons. I would like to argue that this is natural and necessary to some extent. People are motivated by what benefits them personally.
All your relationships, pretty much everything you do, has a selfish aspect to it. You're not in a relationship with someone because you're being kind towards them, you're in a relationship because it benefits you, and hopefully it's mutually beneficial.
So, you need to let people be just a little bit selfish, because you need them to be motivated. Without people working for the sake of personal motivation, open source wouldn't work.
I think they could be, if they lead to subscriptions and long-term success for his channel. Not saying it was in any way ethically justifiable, just that from a purely machiavellian perspective I think it could make sense.
I find it fascinating how the higher-cost and therefore counter-intuitive alternative, can sometimes be the better choice, due to long-term secondary effects that doesn't show up on said paper.
Reminds me of the value of developing your own advanced projects, which is a huge cost (and risk) for a country or a company, but which can pay off big time in the long run through developing advanced marketable industry, exportable competence and just creating lots of jobs.
I had no idea about this either. For me this screams of a dystopian future civilization (which is apparently now) where even access to the outdoors has been limited due to overpopulation and is now regulated through a lottery.
I mean, I get it, I understand that they need to limit the amount of people visiting certain sensitive ecosystems, but still... something about this just seems fundamentally wrong to me. Access to the great outdoors, to nature, seems like such a fundamental human right to me.
Stoicism for me is about practicing a sort of pre-acceptance of such things. To understand that everything bad that can happen eventually will happen (if you live long enough) and to accept it even before it has happened.