Yeah, why can’t they just quietly trudge towards our own extinction with resignation like the rest of us, instead of making a fuss.

Sure, though to many of us it’s a lot of money and investment to take something from very unpleasant to kind of palatable.

That’s not the case around me, where the fancier the coffee shop the lighter the roast typically. And many smaller roasters are selling very pale cinnamon roasts under the heading “medium”.

The trouble is, many people really dislike an acidic light-bodied cup full of floral notes. Plus often they’re not especially skillfully made and I’m pretty sure some people are reacting to very thin acidic, sometimes woody and vegetal, cups and assuming that if they don’t like this, they must want dark roasts.

As usual, it’s shouldn’t be a binary, and they might enjoy a traditional medium roast, or perhaps a better prepared lighter roast. Personally I hate acrid, shiny-bean dark roast, but I’m not sure I hate it more than some of the cups of woody acid I’ve been offered from some enthusiast “high end” coffee shops around here.

That is a widespread assumption, since roasting breaks down the caffeine somewhat, but Hoffman did a test and found higher caffeine in darker roast brews, and speculated that while there was less in the bean, it may be more extractable. There’s also the issue that the more you roast the bean, the less each bean weighs so you get more beans per unit weight.

I’m not triggered by any of this. I’m not sure why my thinking the question is inane would count as “being triggered”.

Upvotes does not necessarily mean people agree with OP’s stance.

It should mean they think it’s a useful/interesting question and I think it very much is not. It’s just someone whining that it doesn’t look like something they’re used to and a bunch of very patient people generously leading them through the very basics of the language that’s well covered in many introductory tutorials - as such it makes it all a waste of time and worthy of being buried.

The more time I spend on Lemmy the more depressed I am about its potential.

Stupid, wrong-headed comments get solid upvotes if they also hint at some popular sentiment. I even see comments that are literally unreadable nonsense get solidly upvoted, either by bots or by people who just like the vibe they feel from scanning it and don’t care that it’s gobbledygook. Some content makes me wonder if half of Lemmy is just LLMs barfing back and forth at each other.

Then this post is heavily upvoted, even though it’s nothing more than “the syntax isn’t the same as the other language(s) I have seen, waaaaa!”. Is it just people like to see Go criticized? Because there are actual real issues that could be discussed.

We can’t imagine anything but unfettered capitalism, so onward we go to our own destruction!

But our ignorant misconceptions are ubiquitous so they have become truth!

What problems with AMD Ryzen? I’ve been happy with them, except one that had excessive power drain on suspend.

Really.

AFAIK the ID law is a consequence of a centuries-old right that you cannot be required to identify yourself if you’re doing nothing wrong, and then even if you did do something wrong, you still can’t be required to have brought ID with you since it’s likely you didn’t set out knowing you’d be doing that today.

But the surveillance/camera thing is recent, when rights of ordinary people apparently are less fashionable.

You know I said UK but this is exactly the sort of law that tends to be different in NI.

I’m the UK England and Wales you can’t be required to carry ID at all.

If the police ask you for them, you have 7 days to present them at a police station.

(Edit: really not sure it extends to Scotland where such laws often vary, and pretty sure it doesn’t apply to NI, where they vary even more, especially on driving/licensing, so UK was inaccurate)

We’re not in the Anthropocene because the next epoch hasn’t taken shape yet. What humanity has done is create a transition from the holocene to whatever epoch will come next, the nature of which is unknown though we can predict some aspects. The idea that this right now is the new geological epoch is absurd hubristic misunderstanding of what a geological epoch is.

It’s not an epoch any more than the crash that totaled your car is your new car.

Well on Reddit, programmerhumor was mostly populated by people weirdly proud of how bad they are at their job, so I don’t see how Lemmy was going to be different.

I’ve worked in a few startups, and it always annoys me when people say they don’t have time to do it right. You don’t have time not to do it right - code structure and clarity is needed even as a solo dev, as you say, for future you. Barfing out code on the basis of “it works, so ship it” you’ll be tied up in your own spaghetti in a few months. Hence the traditional clean-sheet rewrite that comes along after 18-24 months that really brings progress to its knees.

Ironically I just left the startup world for a larger more established company and the code is some of the worst I’ve seen in a decade. e.g. core interface definitions without even have a sentence explaining the purpose of required functions. Think “you’re required to provide a function called “performControl()”, but to work out its responsibilities you’re going to have to reverse-engineer the codebase”. Worst of all this unprofessional crap is part of that ground-up 2nd attempt rewrite.

What do you think comments are?

These are arguments talking past each other. Sure 1 useful comment and 9 redundant ones can be better than zero, but comments are not reliable and often get overlooked in code changes and become misleading, sometimes critically misleading. So often the choice is between not enough comments versus many comments that you cannot trust and will sometimes tell you flat-out lies and overall just add to the difficulty of reading the code.

There’s no virtue in the number of comments, high or low. The virtue is in the presence of quality comments. If we try to argue about how many there should be we can talk past each other forever.

My guess at the stance is I’d imagine it’s that switching away from snaps is switching away from Ubuntu’s support and security monitoring and updates to some less known/reliable/diligent third party?

Popey (Alan Pope) used to work for Canonical / Ubuntu, so he’s presumably not inclined to jump on the bandwagon of Canonical/Ubuntu/snap hate since he knows a lot of Canonical and Ubuntu people and their motivations and work. Not that there aren’t good reasons to criticize snap or other Canonical decisions, but it’s also plain that a lot of people just join a hate bandwagon and don’t even know what about it they object to. There is masses of wrong-headed criticism of Canonical out there e.g. I’ve frequently seen people criticize creating Upstart, saying Canonical should have used systemd, or bzr vs git! Presumably these people were annoyed at Canonical for not inventing a time machine.

nice of him to take credit for the circumstances of his life. As of it was his choice to be born

Wow, you’re so clever to see the obvious consequences of what he said. It’s pretty amazing that he said all this without realizing.

Hey, but here’s a thought: perhaps that point was his intention all along!? Perhaps sometimes people say one thing to draw attention to another unsaid thing? Could that happen? If it did, rather than you being clever, it would make you look like an idiot.

What? We’re burning more fossil fuels than ever and the earth feedback loops seem to be kicking off. Just because we’re also expanding use of less destructive energy sources doesn’t mean we’re curbing output. Making things worse slightly less quickly isn’t making things better.