Meditations isn't good, and the advice that people should read it before reading Discourses (Epictetus) is often what creates a misleading view on stoicism as they never get to Discourses because of the larger time commitment. However it's this time commitment and patience that is at the core of stoicism.
If you read Discourses, you would recognize your error in believing that a man can be free in jail, for he does not have the ability to choose where or how to exist, those are both limited directly by the existence of the jail. He can tolerate it, but not be free, as a stoic would tolerate a broken arm rather than claiming the broken arm makes them stronger.
You've made the experience more tedious to create now. If we adhere to the article's advice, you work from the novice upwards. You create more and more freedom as you go up, you also have an easier time catching problems between levels this way.
In your proposal, we're expected to start from the top magically creating the best experience, and then jumping back down to novice users, and then scaling up back towards expert level to cover the gaps. It sounds quite jarring, and in practice it winds up leading to lackluster tutorials made by experts who overestimate everyone else's levels (see: "How to draw an owl: draw a circle, now draw the rest of the owl").
Most operating systems have a lot of really useful shortcuts that most people don't use despite it potentially making their lives 10x easier like Ctrl/Cmd+C. Swipe to undo, holding down the key to access accented keys (also works on address bars as it prompts you to add common domains like .com or .net), slide to type, etc. An easy way to discover most of these (on iOS specifically) is just to go through the working with text section in the iOS Tips app.
Definitely in agreement, also a big proponent of gradually increasing taxes to incentivize certain spending to speed up that process. They're not popular but very effective.
The good news is a lot of the positive change is already in progress. Bad news is the national goals for many countries are all still minimum 25 years away with people desperately clinging onto the hope that some magical technological breakthrough will happen that ensures we don't have to sacrifice anything currently.
>And what exactly is the solution there? For most Americans a car is literally their ONLY option for transport.
The administration has already earmarked substantial amounts for various transit programs across the country thankfully. You can find out more https://www.transit.dot.gov/TOD
These programs also include zero-emission transit as a primary focus where possible, such as school buses.
So the solution already exists and is in action. It just takes time!
Nobody wants to sacrifice anything, and yet that's exactly what is needed from humanity. Can't even change the small things, as we see through outrage over plastic straws still, nevermind trying to get people to eat less meat.
I will add however that oil companies wouldn't stop processing so much oil right away, they will do what desperate powers do which is cling to remaining power as tightly as they can. This isn't something worth really caring about in the long run, but something to be cognizant of when trying to shift public behaviour as they will undoubtedly be affected by the propaganda such powers will be obsessively pushing out.
See also: tobacco companies spending several decades avoiding regulatory processes in advertising and convincing people they had no idea it was harmful nor that it was their fault for encouraging such consumption. Sounds a little familiar to several other industries.
On one hand, the rule is good, on the other a loss for everyone else who enjoys influential figures demonstrating how petty and childish they are behind the layers of image crafting.
They can keep padding their resume if it means little fixes actually happen. Even typos and little translations, they affect the general reputability of the software. Sounds like a fair trade, especially as most hiring companies can just look at PRs and see what was actually changed very easily.
Closed doesn't mean resolved, it means closed. Closing issues just shifts them to another tab, doesn't remove them entirely. What you propose, a filter to hide these, is exactly what has been done just through the official open/closed filters.
They can upgrade hardware to bleeding edge faster than consumers can get their hands on remotely comparable products. Most consumers also don't upgrade every year to stay on bleeding edge, they just tolerate what they can currently do. While this will be fine for most, those actually using generative AI for work aren't likely going to tolerate stagnation as easily.
This has very little to do with animations, as most OS use of complex animations tends to be handled very effectively (ie mission control on Mac or the task view on Windows 11). They do all of that while also handling complex translucency effects and not breaking a sweat, even on $500 hardware.
When you are launching a program and it doesn't do something immediately, this has far more to do with networking, external layers like antiviruses pre-scanning, infected device, or app(s) hogging available resources.
They still wouldn't be a monopoly engine-wise, even excluding Unity you have Godot and O3DE as popular open source options. Ignoring that a lot of studios are now sharing internal custom engines, like Sony's studios with the Decima engine.
USB C isn't legislated that strictly, it provides a sane baseline, exactly like USB 2 was. Easiest way for you to understand it is C is an official baseline, 2.0 was an unofficial baseline.
You can still easily add your "technologically superior" port to your devices alongside the standard.
Epic will never have a monopoly as long as Steam exists. They aren't complete fools here, they realize this but are aware that even having a slice of that massive pie is enough to fuel numerous positions in the future.
It's not just graphics, it's everything. Look at Frostbite for example from EA. While a good shooter engine, they had to make significant changes over the years to adapt the engine to other genres of games, and that significantly bloated timelines. Jason Schreier has reporting on this if you're interested.
We kind of forget that a lot of custom engines aren't universal ones like Unity or Unreal that can adapt to anything you throw at it. Custom engines are largely hyper specific to the type of game they were making with it, everything else is experimental, untested, undocumented, or non-existent!