yogsototh

I think we shouldn’t wait for the billionaires to disappear to make efforts.

Saying as long as billionaires are polluting I can still pollute as usual is simply dismissing our own responsibility.

Even though, I agree, billionaires should be the first to make the largest effort.

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.

“Hi computer! Write me a program that make money. I must just run it and I become rich.”

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).

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 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.

This was a very great article to read whose title does not make justice to the content.

I think I kind of dislike the generalization on generation. To me recently there are simply a lot more people that see programming as a job and not as much as a passion.

I learnt programming as a scientific activity and not as a productive one. So this was driven by creativity. And many in my promotion shared these values. But even in my time, many were just interested in the job. And of course, these people were not as effective. They were mediocre in comparison to people programming in their free time.

And yes, there is probably a lot more people like this today, in particular in younger generation. But there are still a lot of people programming for fun in their free time in the latest generation. This is just, they are now hidden by the majority of more “normal” people. Because let’s face it. Attitude of people programming during the week-end for super long hours while still programming for work during the week is not sane and abnormal.

Edit: a big missing part is that passionate dev are not necessarily what company prefer. Because yes, they can do incredible work. But quite often I see company prefer to have few of them and a bunch of more mediocre but reliable developers.

The morons… Why use a computer if you don’t have full power?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle