People at the University of Washington don’t refer to soda pop the same way as people at Berkley, or at MIT, or at Oxford. Why would they all have had the exact same term for writing software?

Edit: I’m being argumentative, but I don’t think the point is entirely invalid

It’s probably predominantly because of the switch to mobile computing / smartphones / web being dominant, and everyone referring to programs there as “apps” / applications.

i.e. If you write a mobile app with a function-as-a-service backend, you will never compile what someone would refer to as a “program”, so calling yourself a “programmer” (as-in, someone who makes programs) feels inaccurate and a not helpful description for people. “Coder” (as-in, someone who writes code) is a vaguer in terms of the type of code you write and more accurate in terms of what you spend your time producing.

Also anyone writing scripts, or even just using stuff like AWS Lambda / functions as a service, etc. etc.

In your specific circles.

I won’t.

He was a predictable product of the American culture / political system. His death doesn’t fix anything that caused him to rise.

Where did I say this?

👀

The US pumped massive percentages of its GDP into

…

Which changes absolutely nothing from the perspective of NATO

Lmao yes it does. It only doesn’t if you declare “I’m ignoring this information”, and stick your head in the sand.

That’s not reasoning, that’s weaponized incompetence.

Let’s remember that the US has been, by far, the richest country in the world since the world wars, largely because it stayed out of them til the ends, and issued massive loans to European countries that they continued to profit off of for decades and decades.

You talk about GDP percentage, as if every country had a similar GDP per capita, and could thus afford to spend similarly. The reality is that the US had more then enough money to both fund its military and fund its social programs, but it chose to instead fund the military and the already wealthy.

Maybe you should have spent some of those years studying law.

This is a post from an LLM.

Lol this is an interesting shower thought, the fact that you’re taking it seriously makes me wonder if you spent too much time in Sovereign Citizen circles, or just watched Mircacle on 34th Street too many times.

Overly simplistic. Lots of things are the abuse of anxiety.

Objectively false my friend.

How would animals have morals if that was the case? Why would they have a sense of fairness baked into them if it came from a religion they couldn’t possibly comprehend?

The reality is that morality as we perceive it, is mostly just the natural rules that let us work together. This little known scientific concept called ‘apes strong together’, meant that the people who possessed a basic sense of morality could work with others and accomplish more, then those without it, and those without it, died off.

That’s all morality is. It has nothing do with any magical creature.

And what hardware do they run Linux on? And what phone do they use? And what TV device?

And if they’re not a mac fan boy, then they’re insistence of looking at Apple as the only possible sign of industry trends is mind boggingly narrow.

Do I really miss it? It never once came up in any practical situation.

You would buy a mobo and a CPU and put them together and not think about the specific buses or controllers you have available, unless you had a very specific reason to.

Unless we’re talking about a mobile power constrained device, I certainly would rather have expandable RAM and graphics cards then everything slammed in a single unchanging chip.

And again, the fact that the author states that Nvidia can’t release an integrated SoC because they didn’t buy ARM, when they actively sell an integrated SoC licensed from ARM, makes the entire rest of their “opinion”, untrustworthy.

This is a bad article. It’s just an Apple fanboy watching their company continue its trend of shitting on customers and assuming that everyone inevitably will, apparently never once reflecting on whether their insistence of sticking with Apple is the real problem.

Their argument boils down to CPUs increasingly integrating basic versions of other components over time meaning that desktops will disappear… Ignoring that the desktop market has stayed surprisingly flat that entire time and has certainly not disappeared.

If your argument is that integrated CPUs will outclass discrete components connected with high speed buses then you need to make it from an engineering standpoint, not a headline one.

I also don’t understand his reasoning that because NVidia don’t buy ARM they don’t get to make an integrated CPU… Nvidia made and sold an integrated ARM CPU before ever being rumoured to buy them, and they still make and sell it to this day … because ARM’s entire business model is based on companies like Nvidia licensing their designs.

XD you think the CIA can’t crack your closet server? Bruh, get real.

There is none. Theres like 0.1% of people who complain about it who have a valid point.

And those points are always meaningless in light of the alternative’s drawbacks.

Oh yeah, I was just expanding on the non turbine power types cause I think they’re neat.

Though I missed some of the most interesting ones: Nuclear Batteries.

Edit: just realized that ngram already mentioned these.

They’re different from chemical batteries in that they can’t be charged or discharged, and their energy comes not from chemical reactions, but from radioactive decay.

Thermal-nuclear batteries convert heat into electricity, including completely solid state ones like radioisotope generators, that use an array of thermo-couples to convert heat into electricity, not turbines.

Then there are Beta-Voltaic nuclear batteries that use specialized semi-conductor circuits to convert the electrons and positrons emitted from a radioactive material into usable electricity.

Neither of these produce anywhere near enough power output for a flying suit, nor can their power output vary, but still interesting to think about in the context of Tony Stark’s arc reactor.

The biggest problem IMO is the fact that all our power generation technology comes down to “boil water to turn turbine”. How we generate the heat changes, but not how we turn it into electricity.

Technically the ones that use steam to spin turbines are:

• Coal plants
• Gas plant
• Thermal Solar Plants
• Nuclear Fission Plants
• Nuclear Fusion Plants

Then you have ones that spin turbines, but using other methods:

• Hydro dams and tidal power - use water
• Engines / Generators - use controlled explosions
• Wind Turbines - use wind

Then you have the few that truly don’t use spinning turbines:

• Solar Panels - they use semi-conductors specially designed so that light causes the electrons in the material to start flowing, directly creating usable electricity.

• Piezo Electrics - similar semiconductors that react to material stress (bending etc) and cause electrons to flow

• Batteries & Fuel Cells - store power in chemical form, and the reactions cause the electrons to flow directly

• (Proposed) Direct Energy Converters - experimental devices long proposed for nuclear fusion reactors that can directly produce flowing electrons. There’s been recent research investigating doing this with fission reactors as well.

Everyone here is correct about power being the biggest limiting factor.

The number 2 factor though is concussions.

Concussions don’t usually happen from something slamming into your head, most concussions happen from your head moving quickly and then coming to a sudden stop, and your sloshy brain inside still has momentum and slams against the inside of your skull.

It’s why you can get badly concussed in something like a car accident even if your head never hits anything. Or in football / hockey, even just a big full speed hit to the chest can give you a concussion.

The way Tony Stark moves in that suit would give him constant concussions. You cannot move that quickly and suddenly come to a stop. Until we have a way of transferring consciousness to a computer or something solid state, theres no chance of ever directly piloting an iron man suit.