deleted by creator

I find it funny that the pufferfish blows up at its own gunshot

Also asexual.

Just consider most people really like sex, and some experience it as a very intense physical want to the point it makes sense that a bad version of it is better than none at all. Sort of similar to food. Better to have bad-tasting food and at least sate your hunger than to have nothing and starve.

Although, of course, it breaks down. The comments talk about actively harmful sex people wouldn’t want as well as harmful documentation; bad sex and documentation is not actually always better than no sex or no documentation. In the analogy, this would be sex that gives you an STD, or documentation that sends you running in circles and misleads you.

I’ve found a lot of understanding sex comes with just understanding a lot of people really really want it and experience it as a nigh-on need. Maybe liken it to some intense desires you have, things you need to be happy that you nonetheless don’t need to survive. (Of course, this is a generalization, I understand not all people with sexual desires have them this intensely. Some don’t need it to be happy but would sure like it a lot. And some might even get it more mildly. But for the purpose of understanding more mainstream jokes, analogies, etc. about sex…)

deleted by creator

I was a happy MuseScore user before and after the UI changes. So this post brings to mind questions that usually float in my mind:

• When I can happily use a thing whose UX is criticized: is it just because I don’t know any better alternatives, or because I’ve spent so long with it that of course I know how to work it? Or is the UX really not that bad? Or is it that there are often general solutions for most of the population, but sometimes some people take really well to things that work poorly for others and vice versa? Is it that the hated parts are bits I do not touch much in my workflow, so of course I see no problems because I am not interacting with the problem parts?
• When I have difficulty using a thing whose UX is praised or has no criticism: is it because I am smoothbrained? That I just have not had enough time trying to figure it out, so of course I struggle and just need to apply myself more? Is it something that works for most, but it will not work for everyone? Am I in a really niche use case with bad UX that nobody else has bothered to complain about?

I do not have enough UX knowledge to criticize or make objective evaluations here. I only have how easy it is for me to navigate applications. Though I would like to work on gaining it someday, especially so I can help out FOSS targets of “bad UX” complaints.

Some people actively desire this kind of algorithm because they find it easier to find content they like this way. I’m not sure if they are immune to doomscrolling and actually have gotten it to work in a way that serves them and doesn’t involve doomscrolling, or if they are doomscrolling and okay with it. But for me, I really wish I could go back to the chronological feed era.

If you thought this was fun you might like https://jsisweird.com/ with similar questions

This is both sweet and funny. I’d love to have a spouse like that. Thanks for taking care of them :)

deleted by creator

https://jakec007.github.io/2020-06-28-how-we-trick-rocks-to-think/ fun, accessible-for-non-experts related article

Today we’re going to explore how the thinking rocks that power your computer are created.

At first I thought this was the Wicked Witch of the West’s actress and thought she must have been multitalented. Then I looked it up to verify. Nope, same name, different women.

Can’t think of anything that could serve a major need right now, but I absolutely identified things in my life where I could use a preexisting tool to accomplish my goal, but it’s much less hassle for me to use the one I made for myself. You don’t have to transform the world, sometimes you can help yourself with a minor inconvenience and then put it out there for anyone who might find themselves with the same inconvenience.

TIL!

Can exit nano on my own, have the common sense to not call in a panic about it before at least looking it up. (Which is how I learned how to exit it: looking it up.) But was never taught about ^ meaning “Control+” until your comment, especially since nowadays people write it out as “Control+” or “CTRL+”.

I might have put two and two together when dealing with everything else in nano after I learned to exit, but never really internalized the rule “^ means Control+”. So thank you for your comment!

Disclaimer: I feel like I am too stupid for most of programming.dev but participate here anyways because I learn stuff from the comments.

First learning is last learning.

I’ll be the dumb one to ask: what do you mean? Is this that making a mistake that costs a lot is the best teacher, because you only have to mess it up once to learn it forever?

I do wonder about inventions that actually changed the world or the way people do things, and if there is a noticeable pattern that distinguishes them from inventions that came and went and got lost to history, or that did get adopted but do not have mass adoption. Hindsight is 20/20, but we live in the present and have to make our guesses about what will succeed and what will fail, and it would be nice to have better guesses.

deleted by creator

We also have !softwaregore@programming.dev!

OP has a very appropriate username for posting software gore. I guess I kind of do too.

don’t post pictures of my face online, that’s rude >:(

In all seriousness I wonder why I always realize I could have explained myself better/left something out/omg formatting error better fix it/holy shit typo after the initial commit, and have like 4 different ones (or a bunch of rebases in an effort to keep the repo clean of this crap) fixing it, instead of pushing just a correct and complete readme from the beginning.

This is also why most of my Lemmy comments have edits. Not some weird sketchy crap editing things in to make others look bad or totally change my point after getting refuted, but just… oops typo or I could reword that to be more understandable or I meant to say this and totally forgot about it.

Whoever made this graphic, it looks pretty attractive just on sheer visuals, props to you

Luckily I have not met any programmer like that yet, let’s keep our fingers crossed.

I’m willing to believe the bar to pass to be a successful programmer requires a certain level of problem-solving skill and intelligence; but that doesn’t mean no other profession has smart people. I’d imagine lots of other professions have a similar bar to pass, and even ones with lower bars to pass to succeed in that profession probably still have their prodigies and geniuses.