kovac

Also, Gogol's Chichikov is a better metaphor for the dysfunctional corpo software dev than Akakyevitch...

Implemented search for my website (lup) using Perl + FastCGI + SA index. A throwback to the old net.

Send me some search traffic, and ideas on what I could improve. I've linked the source for both search and the benchmarks.

> My goal now is to use less words to convey an idea.

This is what I'm encouraged by Grammarly as well. To some extent, perhaps the book "Elements of style" encourages this too.

However, I read Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. She writes long (wordy?) sentences that are clear, and even feels beautiful to read. I really enjoyed her writing.

But I'm not a native speaker. A question for the native speakers: what's your take on this? Has Shelly's writing style gone out of fashion, or are these two (Shelley's style and succinctness) different things?

I'm not convinced that we can spend quality time with loved ones outside work while spending most of our time at work pretending, and doing useless or unnatural things. I think what you practise shapes you.

Right. During times I'm looking for a job, I use uBlock Origin to completely hide the feed. Otherwise, I see no reason to use LinkedIn at all anymore.

I think this is the right place to start.

A free OS will empower developers to implement technical workarounds that could trick these apps into working there. If the OS is tightly controlled, we have no recourse.

Even in the worst case scenario, we could use a cheap big-tech-approved phone for these applications (a glorified digital token) and use the free phone for everything else. When there's enough adoption and trust in the new phone, non-technical avenues are available to influence these organizations to accept the alternative.

If winning means mass adoption, I think by definition free software won't win while remaining free.

If a tech becomes main stream, corporations (and people) begin commercializing it. The de facto strategy in our era for commercializing any tech is surveilling its users.

If a technology can't be harnessed, corporations will contain if not outright kill it.

We've seen this time and time again. So, the only way to win, in the sense of surviving and thriving, would be for that tech to fly under the radar. Remain in the hands of individuals who care and build it for themselves. In that sense, there are many free software that have already won.

My question is, why on earth are people obsessed with things like the year of the Linux desktop, and more people adopting their software.

Fragmentation is probably the only way free software will remain free.

Thank you for sharing. As a hobbyist with a devotion to the field, I'm fascinated by how the actual professionals work. It's a very challenging domain.

When professionals use Arduinos for such use cases, do they use the Arduino software platform or do they use the chio verndors' toolchains? Just curious how the professionals work with these things.

> My daycare sends me updates, my barbershop tells me when they're closing and I used it to sell my fridge.

To consider the other side of this, read "The age of surveillance capitalism" by Shoshana Zuboff (really read it though, not chatgpt the summary :).

All the benefits you mentioned are real. But, at what cost and could we have reaped the same benefits without surrendering all agency to those who can't be held accountable?