A FOSS fast paced first person shooter with customizable loadouts, user run dedicated servers and community built maps. Think call of duty meets openarena.
They serve another purpose. Credentials with red tape to get test another aspect of someone's capability: the willingness to tolerate senseless bullshit in order to get ahead. For a lot of jobs that's a requirement, you won't do well at some places and in some fields without it.
Well, where interview requirements reflect actually doing the job, I'd guess the correlation would be significantly higher, no? If interview requirements don't correlate with job performance, I'd conclude the interview process is flawed. After all, the whole point of an interview is to assess performance capability, if it isn't doing that then you need a new process.
I share the dream, but I season it with a splash of optimism.
The internet is a revolution in information availability and communications capability. People can, right now, learn anything they want, anything at all, for free, all they need is interest, dedication and to prioritize setting aside time for it. The business world still largely operates on the old paradigm though: signaling capability through credentials. But as companies find time and time again that the two don't always (or even usually) correlate, they're creating interesting interview processes to assess capabilities. The credential is largely a legacy requirement in environments like this.
The pace of this change is accelerating. I think over the coming decades you're going to see less importance placed on credentials in technical fields, and people will begin to just learn what they're interested in, what can get them ahead in life, on their own time, and try to work in those fields on their merit and capability. I do believe that one day people won't need credentials, they'll only need to prove themselves. This is easier for honest people but harder for grifters and phonies.
Of course, there are jobs for which mindless obedience, willingness to waste hours of your life and capacity to eat shit are defining characteristics for success. Hopefully those jobs go away, but as long as they exist, they'll have senseless requirements like credentials that people will go through the rigmarole to get. Jobs built out of red tape will have red tape.
Well, the reasoning is that the machine is our property, our resources are used to run it, so we should be able to decide what runs on it. We can, of course, waive that right on a per case basis and run proprietary software, but we shouldn't, or at least we should be wary of it and avoid normalizing it.
If you decide you will not run any software on your machine who's source is unavailable to you, that is your right. It's your property.
Not the same argument. Not all outcry is supported by the same level of reasoning.
Time zones boil down to "for consistency's sake, we cannot have an infinitely granular way of setting time across longitudes" and people chopped the world into slices. At the middle of each slice, noon is supposed to be noon and is denoted with "12:00(pm)". This is a sensible compromise between clocks changing by the second based on GPS coordinates and the whole world having the same time. " noon is when we decide makes the most sense logistically" is not the argument here, it takes the nuance out. Noon is when, at the middle of the time zone, the sun is midway in the daylight part of the cycle. This is the crux of it, not simply "we all decided". We all decided because of something. there has to be a basis in reality, otherwise society is just shared delusion and things go off the rails quickly.
"Noon" is when the sun is midway through its daylight cycle. We call that "12:00(pm)" for the sake of measurement.
Switching to UTC worldwide is just as bad as switching to DST, except at meridian.
Time does not change naturally; noon is noon is noon is noon.
I'm not proposing what you think I'm proposing. I'm saying the only sane solution to this is permanent standard time, which is what I think you want too, and that permanent daylight time is not more sane than switching twice a year.
No they're not all delusion, one is an abstraction, the others are delusion.
Noon is when the sun is 50% done with its cycle from rise to set. We base our clocks on that. Not delusion, abstraction. It is simply a measure of objective reality.
Deciding that noon is at 1:00pm on the longest days of the year so that the sun can set at night instead of evening is delusion. Deciding to make that permanent all year around isn't any better.
Yeah, but that doesn't explain why permanent DST instead of just ending DST. "People don't like switching clocks, and I've got the solution! Let's make the mass delusion permanent!" Can we just end the madness altogether?
So then what's the point of any of this? If you live your life based on what the clock says, why change what the clock says in relation to the position of the sun at all?
At this point your main clocks, your phone and your computer, change themselves for you. Daylight savings time is no big deal really, it's just something to gripe about.
That said, I'm heavily in favor of ending it. It's stupid. But I disagree that permanent DST is less stupid than time changes. I think the idea of permanently having the clock say an hour later than it is is just as senseless or more so than the yearly switch. Just end this madness and be done with it.
Goodness. Just end daylight savings time, problem solved. Oh you don't like waking up at 6, you'd rather wake up at 7? Well I've got news for you, you're waking up at the same time either way it's just that the clock shows an hour later. What time it is is when the sun comes up and goes down, not what number it is on the clock, the clock is supposed to be indicative of where the sun is in the sky, not the other way around.
No, the sun rises and sets when it rises and sets. All this means is that at noon the clock says 1:00pm. It's still noon.
People are so disconnected from the world that their abstractions of it become more real to them than actual reality. I don't think it is a good thing.
Why not just make daylight savings time go away and do things "an hour earlier"? You'd literally be waking up at the same exact time, just that the clock will say 6 instead of 7 or whatever. Are we really so far gone as a society that we will go to such great lengths to fool our brains? It's madness.
So aside the link to "the tyranny of structurelessness" (which I am about to read) the article is basically supporting it's own premise: distributed systems always go awry. I hate to be that guy but there's no proof of this at all. I can see it theoretically, you can never predict all behavior in a system, chaotic systems are unpredictable, etc. But there's no proof of the claim, and the article basically argues that it is true because it is true.
I've worked in these contract cellphone repair/refurbishment facilities many years ago, the big warehouses where telecoms and manufacturers send these warranty phones to be triaged and repaired, and let me tell you, something like this is not surprising at all. Most of the people there did good work, but all it takes is one. Personally I'd never send my phone in to repair, and I'm skittish about buying any refurbished phones.
Useability outside of a very narrow window is abysmal on a product. That's not fair to say? I think it is. Imagine a kitchen knife that only worked with a certain cutting board.
It's not a simple system. Technically all you need is upnp to perform all those functions. A raspberry pi with a build of VLC that only always plays full screen and a slideshow of some kind in between use. However, with the google product specifically it is deliberately designed to handicap itself and require all kinds of extra software (google at services, the YouTube app, etc) on the mobile device. It may look simple from the perspective of someone who already has all the added necessities, but try playing a video on the Chromecast with your own choice of software and you'll see it for the nightmare it is.