“Hi computer! Write me a program that make money. I must just run it and I become rich.”
yogsototh
joined 2 years ago
I would use reagent and reitit if I had to start a new project. But the best tools are generally not the most popular (unintuitively).
Can a line be a cat? I love kittens.
malbolge
and just after haskell
Or best of all, Troll 2, and its explanation movie « Best Worst Movie ».
Synecdoche, New York
maybe? A movie about a theatre piece explaining the life of the author making this show.
I use this nice trick to use Clojure has a bash script. This auto-download clojure so this id quite portable and reproductible.
Previously I also used Haskell’s turtle lib that could run with a portable shebang and it could even be compiled later if you need more speed.
I use emacs org-mode and I export to markdown. If I must start from markdown, I use panda to generate an org-mode from it, and export it back once I'm done.
I feel that I see more and more articles that give the false impression that rich are the only people we should put a pressure for pollution. This will give more and more people the illusion that they can pollute because their pollution is very minor compared to the pollution of the rich.
The reality is while richer people pollute more. The ratio of pollution between a rich and a normal person is not comparable to the ratio of the wealth difference.
In fact, for pollution, everyone effort has a real effect.
More precisely I read an article that made it clear that if a super rich has 100000x more money, they will pollute directly only 40x more than most people. (the number are probably wrong but the order of magnitude is correct).
This mean that pollution is not just for the rich, but for everyone. And your personal effort count.
I don’t see how this could be prevented.
There are already many "small web" movements. With different proposals. Like gemini, sub-set of currently supported web standards (typically no-js, no-css, no POST, etc…)
But the monetized web is doomed to reach a point were it will be controlled in such a way that you will not be able to block ads, not be able to hide your pseudonymous identity.
I remember reading an article many years ago about the cat and mouse game between ads publishers and ad-blockers. The conclusion were that in the end, ads blocker will lose the final war. And with these kind of system we are closer and closer to reach it.
I think we need to collectively find a way to have sub-nets. For example declare that our website conform to certain sub-net properties.
- no-ads
- privacy (no cookie/no js/no user-agent header/no canvas, no css)
- etc…
The small webs are different for everyone. It would be very nice if we could put an HTML header that would list which small webs pattern this page is compatible with. And have a browser that would adapt to your preferences and also a way to filter your small-web preferences in search engine.
The closest to this we have today is probably gemini. But this a very small but friendly web. I am sure we could find other solutions to create an alternative "respecting his users" web.
“Do the right thing” in corporate speak generally means to obey some business conduct to prevent any risk for the company to be sued. Mainly, take care of interest conflicts. Do not personally contribute to hide such issue and there should even be an internal team taking care that if you tell the truth your managers could not retaliate.
Mainly, "Do the right thing" is about protecting Google. Not "Do the right thing for the world and strive for progress".
Google stopped to try to create progress. Instead they just need innovation. This is what they are after. Innovation, not progress anymore.
I think the message that want to be passed by this article is probably pro-oil industry. It gives a false impression that we could tackle ecology not by changing our habits but just be mad at a few billionaires. And this is factually false.
Unlike wealth pollution is more equitably shared among people. Here in order to demultiply the calculated pollution of billionaires they introduced thier industry and the pollution of their employees somehow.
And while it is expected these people pollute more. Getting rid of them will not reduce the pollution as one could expect.
unfortunately everyone, even not the wealthiest will need to change how they live to have a visible impact on pollution. broadly speeking, not just CO2, as we have a lot more ecological problems than global warming. Note the focus on global warming alone is also a strategy to hide the real changes that need to ne made in order to prevent humanity to hurt itself too much by destroying its own ecosystem.
Edit: As I am being downvoted it looks people probably misunderstood my message. I would gladly get rid of super rich people. But while this would help, we would all still need to make efforts. Until we accept that we should change our way of life, we will not solve our balance with our ecosystem.