sdfzguf

If you experience something, it's already subjective. No need for the "imo" -escape. Same goes for sentiment. The sentiment is already what you observed, no need to further interprete that. Just share what you see. This is overly careful to a point where it almost lacks any content.

Edit: To make this constructive, you could add why people think so and share a related link or something.

This gave me chills for a second. I extensively have active noise cancelling on with no music playing. Several hours a day. After a quick search I couldn't find any good results on this topic. I feel like you should provide some links or anything on that topic? I'd be glad to look into this.

Why normalize it? People critizise stigmas, but I don't feel like this is the case (no pun intended) here. It may vary from where you're at, but in middle europe I'd argue, no one gives you a second look for wearing those (Edit: Or is that the problem? ;) ).

> makes sense to use swap space in aiding suspend to disk if some of the allocated memory is already paged out to it.

Maybe I can learn something here. From my understanding, the RAM image moves completely to the swap space, since the RAM memory is shut down (cleared). I thought, that's why it's calles 'suspend to disk'. During hibernation most components are in a state of being almost shut down. And that would be why you need a disk that can hold data non-volatile (eg not the RAM memory). Edit: From your comment it reads like the swap space is only for assisting the process, while from my understanding that's the place where the whole RAM image resides during sleep.

> a swap partition for the purposes of hibernation, while also disabling swapping of memory while your machine is in-use.

I thought the exact same. Avoid tear of the SSD and security implications, while having the option of hibernation (including the security implications) in case of need.

Even with an own domain, you're not 100% save. But I agree nevertheless.

If there're over 4k die-hard players, as you said, a big portion of it will follow. While I have empathy with your situation, I wonder how many times more things have to go south for you people.

Build a good project and make sure you actually own it (have complete control over it).

What do you mean with 'implementation of your startup'?

I wouldn't say it changed nothing. Take the Guttenberg incidence for example. But more often it doesn't lead to actual repercusions, I agree on that with you.

Edit: This turned into a rant.

"Teach the process"

Learn to learn

etc

The approach the author takes is boring and therefore will not succeed. Maybe future will prove me wrong on this - I'd be fine with it.

My take is an axiom that is omnipresent among tech bubble: Focus on what matters. Let's ask ourself every time we put more than one thought into something: "What is this really about?" "Why do I actually have to do this?" etc. Even without AI our academic systems are being gamified every day. AI just accelerates (and partly even democratize) this movement. People follow a fassade and sadly the system followed. We need to start asking general questions more again. With AI and art this is even more visible. It is often overlooked that AI can not create something new. And you do not have the right to make a living by rearranging and combinging already existing ideas. But exactly this is the metric we should focus on: the new. If you don't want to create something new, then fine, just copy and paste along. But making something new is hard and you'll need to learn the basics yourself (tech the process, learn to learn, etc). But to make this approach imposed is even another misguided junction. It has to come from the one thing that is important: the new, the actual drive, the 'doing it because I want it'

What you describe (act, schedule, delegate, delete) looks like 'ranking' to me. Under 'classification' I'd understand a seperation without ranking entities. And that at least falls under the request of OP (whether it satisfies it or not).

What I don't understand about your comment is the similarity to your scheme that just has the 'cost' dimention addionally. The 'cost' doesn't make the entities any more 'rankable' though. So why wouldn't I apply your critic to your own proposed system?

This comment is not in bad faith. I'm just a little confused about your point. If you have some sort of experience or qualification in this field, I'd be happy to be corrected.

The website you linked looks neat. Reminds me a little of HN - which I think has a great aesthetic.

Can you make an example on what you mean by aesthetic? Or maybe a describtion of what you mean. Give us something.

It's the 30th of July and I still have not cleared an apprenticeship position (IT) for 1th September. The mental load is increasingly wearing. I'm not having a good time.

It's not that I get declined, but I struggle sending out applications in the first place (because of reasons).