EhForumUser

joined 1 year ago
[–] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca -2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Nothing cares whether you present yourself as being nice or not. Information has no feelings.

But the Lemmy devs clearly pushed that responsibility downstream under the contractual terms of using the software. Maybe that made the agreement a bad deal, but nobody else had to ever agree to the bad terms. It seems you did agree to it. Why?

What the contract also allowed, however, was the ability for you to modify the software as you see fit. That part is a good deal. It seems the solution is staring you right in the face. Since you're already committed, why spend your typing here and not in your favourite code editor?

[–] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

if you added up all of developers at the FAANG companies you still would not have an appreciable percentage of the developers in the US workforce let alone the world.

Hmm. I've never taken "lots" to be a proportional term before. The dictionary uses "a lot of people at the gala last night" as an example of how "lots" is often used.

What kind of gala is attended by an appreciable percentage of the world's population? Words can mean whatever want them to mean, of course, but in terms of common usage, surely it implies something like hundreds of people at best?

[–] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The theory behind why CSAM is illegal is that if someone is willing to pay for CSAM it incentivizes production of even more CSAM content to receive more payment. That incentivized additional production means even more abuse. A perfectly reasonable take and something that I think can be demonstrated.

But why would you accidentally seeing CSAM prompt you to give payment to create that incentivization? Are you worried that you're a closeted pedophile that will be ready to shower those who record such content to see more and more as soon as you get your first taste?

[–] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The comment’s math would mean developers are making roughly 306,000/year.

Yes, developers at places like Google are making that much. Not the average developer, but nobody said the average developer.

[–] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Fair, but it has also lost its connotations with being an insult over the decades.

Being a geek and/or nerd became economically useful when we moved into the information age, and thus is now considered in high regard. The average Joe is now envious of geeks and nerds. Most people would love to be able to trade places with Bill Gates or Elon Musk.

Of course, it wasn't always that way.

[–] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Geek and nerd had negative connotations when geeks and nerds were commonly poor, but then things shifted and, notably with the rise of the Information Age, being a geek and/or nerd turned into being useful in becoming wealthy. Now it is a compliment.

True of all insults, really. Same reason, for example, words with associations to slavery are considered insults. Or those related to the sale of sexual favours. The implication is that one is poor. Any words you can throw at someone who is rich will be something most people will want to wear as a badge of honour.

[–] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Should definitely make an English word for exactly that.

We have! Teacher.

[–] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

What is insulting about geek and nerd?

Is it the biting a chicken's head off thing? I'm not really sure how that translates to an insult, though. Maybe you are ashamed of biting chicken heads? But if that's the case, stop biting chicken heads?

[–] EhForumUser@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago

Huffman wanted to see what all the fuss was about.