People behind ISO 216 thought of everyting

how to make a good standard:

step 1: copy from DIN

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_216#History

because of two bodies can not occupy the same space, the feather and the ball will be in different position when you drop them. And therefor gravitation will pull the earth slightly more toward the ball and slightly less toward the feather.

I like the explanation that devious spirits cannot say this phrase and that’s why it’s used

Evil spirits can not say the same word twice in a row. Foxes can not say “moshi”. With “moshi moshi” you get a 2-for-1 special.

so… it turns into a VRMMORPG fantasy Isekai?

Why can’t anyone study to become a qualified surgeon?

anyone can try

what are you going to do when there’s night

sleep

Most Adobe tools don’t have any good free alternatives even for home use.

inkscape is on a level with illustrator (maybe even better)

for drawing: try krita

if you want to pay money (much much less than for adobe): Affinity is on a level with fotoshop

if you just want to make a simple program. It still needs to run in kubernetes.

“hello OPS-team. Here is my simple program. Have fun running it on your kubernetes”

It’s at most 40 years old technolog

the 60s were 60 years ago

Only reason to include 2 full bridge rectifiers

they look like runes.

. But it is trained well enough to correlate left and right together

eliza could do that 60 years ago

the goldberg-steamcrack supports multiplayer. https://gitlab.com/Mr_Goldberg/goldberg_emulator

I only tested it in lan, and it works great. Not sure if it works online, too. You may need hamachi.

And of course: online multiplayer with randos is probably not worth it, as others have pointed out. On one hands it’s probably a bitch to set up. On the other cheating is probably rampant.

But only temporarily

but is it?

I thought the temporal improvement would be for everyone who already used the high way (because they will get to their destination a little bit faster). And for the few extra people, who start to use the highway but didn’t use it before, the improvment will stay.

When you add a new lane to a road, people think that the traffic will be easier there, so they take that route instead of their normal one

so for these people the new lane will create marginal improvement, right?

However you will now have rodent problems

chicken got you covered on that front too https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iubf1oJdQQQ

soft failures add complexity and ambiguity to your system, as it creates many paths and states you have to consider. It’s generally a good idea to keep the exception handling simple, by failing fast and hard.

here is a nice paper, that highlights some exception handling issues in complex systems

https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/osdi14/osdi14-paper-yuan.pdf

where jellyfish

Maybe you should read that link too, and maybe a few others before making such statements.

I am familiar with the idea of communism. I am making an explicit counter pointer to the idea of “pure communism”.

The whole idea of anarchism and communism is to abolish hierarchy. Things being the way they are now doesn’t mean it is inevitable for them to always be like this.

That is a good point actually. But the observation of hierarchy is very very strong (both in humans and in animals). You would need a very strong argument to counter it, which I am not seeing.

It says more about you

… that’s not a strong argument. That’s just a thinly veiled insult.

how much you have to unlearn of your indoctrination (as well as how powerful and successful it is) that you can’t see beyond it

Are you asking me to have faith? Or is there some evidence for your argument?

there will always be a power imbalance. Maybe the divide will not be financial, but there are plenty of other ways for people to gain power over others. During revolutions the divide will often be about how loyal you are to the cause, i.e. people who appear more loyal to the revolution, will have power over people who are less loyal.

I think the article forgot the “Individualization of Responsibility”-talking point.

“When responsibility for environmental problems is individualized, there is little room to ponder institutions, the nature and exercise of political power, or ways of collectively changing the distribution of power and influence in society — to, in other words, ‘think institutionally.’”

https://medium.com/@mitpress/individualization-plant-a-tree-buy-a-bike-save-the-world-ecb916df95e4