Linus does not care about you
-
That's funny because it's the wrong question.
What do we want?
TIME TRAVEL
Where do we want it?
HEREExcept that HERE is not where we'll be in the future, since the Earth is constantly moving through the universe.
Filed Under: The pedantic dickweedery in movies thread is
-
I imagine you'd have to build some sort of landing pad to target, if it weren't for the fact that traveling into the past involves traveling to a position we almost certainly collect. I don't think it's as much of a problem as some would suggest.
-
Except that HERE is not where we'll be in the future, since the Earth is constantly moving through the universe.
Some time machines would take you to wherever the machine was in that time. Not sure if H.G. Wells time machine was one of these.
-
(See: OpenBSD's split from NetBSD).
I think it should be stated that Theo is vastly more entertaining than Linus.
-
I think it should be stated that four wheel steering is vastly more entertaining than two.
MALUCH-tuning – 04:33
— Adrian15223
-
Except that HERE is not where we'll be in the future, since the Earth is constantly moving through the universe.
But the theory of relativity asserts that there's no universal frame of reference, so there's no way to authoritatively assert that a time machine wouldn't move along with the Earth as it travels through time. (In fact, if it's an H. G. Wells, or Primer design time machine, it basically just rests in place and people/things pop in/out of it whenever as desired).
-
Since it was my post, I am authoritatively asserting it for the context of that post.
-
Th thing about time machines is, if you invent one, then the instant you turn it on, you can practically guarantee that someone (possibly a future version of yourself) is going to jump out of it with a shotgun in a hostile attempt to take control of the prime timeline. It's probably not worth the bother tbh...
-
I also read somewhere of the possibility that if a time machine is invented, the time line would keep being changed until it gets to a state where the machine wasn't invented.
-
Under a many-worlds hypothesis, you can neatly sidestep most of the paradoxes (paradoces?) which a single timeline has to deal with.
In Timeline A, you step into the time machine and are never seen again. Maybe you even died in there, who knows?
Meanwhile, over in Timeline B, timeline-A-you jumps out and starts freaking out timeline-B-you, and wacky hijinks ensue. But timeline-A-you can never get back to Timeline A.
Now, if there's a Timeline C, where timeline-C-you jumps into Timeline A, then maybe everyone would just assume that timeline-C-you was timeline-A-you, but anyway, I just gave myself a headache...
-
Under a many-worlds hypothesis, you can neatly sidestep most of the paradoxes (paradoces?) which a single timeline has to deal with.
But then you have a many worlds hypothesis on you.
-
-
Basil Exposition says to try not to think about it.
-
Since it was my post, I am authoritatively asserting it for the context of that post.
No you aren't.
-
-
>...contributing and/or curating bug-free code at a higher rate than Linus does.
Which implies that the best talent is staying and thriving in his community
That's no reason to assume that the best programmers are left, just that enough programmers are left.I propose that the reason that Linus isn't bothered by his propensity to chase people away is because he already has more contributors than he can handle. The way I see it, good management involves being able to effectively use available resources. Linux got to have those resources by being the right thing at the right time; the last missing piece of the gnu puzzle. But there's no way we can say for sure whether it's doing as well as it potentially could, because there's no other project in the same position.
The problem is that there are people out here proselytizing his perkele bullshit. There is a lot of shit already known about what it takes to be a good manager, and going off the rails at people for not knowing what you know isn't it. Linux is famous for being a good kernel developer, not a good manager. If you want management advice, you'd be better off asking people who are known to be good managers rather than some nerd whose had free reign to do whatever the fuck he wants on his own pet projects for the last twenty years.
-
I also read somewhere of the possibility that if a time machine is invented, the time line would keep being changed until it gets to a state where the machine wasn't invented
I think the idea of a time line is something that's convenient for movie plots but won't end up mapping onto reality. This is because reality itself is just whatever's left over when you take every relationship between everything, regardless of any notion of time or space, and just lay them all on top of each other and let the inconsistent ones cancel out. That means that time machines will never cause reality any difficulty whatsoever, because it's self-consistent causality loops all the way down, and are you going to stop bogarting that joint or what?
-
I say the belief that the plans for a time machine could be meaningfully brought back in time betray a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of invention. Like edison said, invention is 99% infrastructure and 1% doodle-godding shit together just to see what works. Plans for a time machine would be as much use to us now as plans for a sandy bridge would be to the romans.
-
The die masks for any modern CPU would look totally cool inscribed in marble on a temple wall.
-
invention is 99% infrastructure
What do we want?
GRADUAL CHANGE
When do we want it?
IN DUE COURSE
-
We know you're Tesla's time traveling pidgeon lover. You just dont want to share the technology with us.
-
Been sharing it with you my whole life. Not my fault that none of you goddam monkeys ever shows the slightest bit of interest in learning the first thing about it.
Filed under: Nobody shares the technology better than this
-
There is a lot of shit already known about what it takes to be a good manager, and going off the rails at people for not knowing what you know isn't it.
What is, then?.. Well. Lemme think.Maybe, some undercarpet games to make your job as miserable as it gets, to make you look incompetent, all the while being "polite" and "respectful", then letting you go because of "underperformance" (can't phone up a fourth party so they pay a third party so a second party knows how much to invoice your company? Your fault. Cannot squeeze 16-man-hour workload in your 8-hour day? You're inefficient, underperforming. You should be really grateful for us putting up with you for so long). Seen that happen. The manager can get away with that while still maintaining an appearance of a very, very polite, diplomatic, professional, and even understanding and deeply caring person.
Which doesn't change the fact that they're really nothing but a little hypocritical shit waiting to be smacked in a kneecap by someone who has got nothing left to lose as a result of their modus operandi.
-
they're really nothing but a little hypocritical shit waiting to be smacked in a kneecap by someone
Man, I'm really glad I didn't have to grow up in the same neighborhood as you.
-
@wft said in Linus does not care about you:
To be productive and competent, you need to be disciplined, motivation comes in the process. If you're not in the mood to act like a competent and responsible developer, go away, you're harming the project and everyone else in it who tries to do a good job.
You just fail to realize how a toxic environment can affect the quality of someone's work. You're like a movie crime boss that think killing some of their minions wouldn't cause any change in the others. That's just not how things work.
-
@fbmac said in Linus does not care about you:
You just fail to realize how a toxic environment can affect the quality of someone's work. You're like a movie crime boss that think killing some of their minions wouldn't cause any change in the others. That's just not how things work.
"Killing" is a really stretching comparison here.
Listen, it's one thing if an arrogant boss nitpicks at every possible bit of your work to devalue you, another thing is if an incompetent person is poisoning the workplace's morale by getting all the praise (because telling the truth would be "toxic"), and a completely another thing is when a person who's known to be competent makes a totally incompetent decision and you react to it so it doesn't get any more destructive.
But!
If two persons know one another well, and they have a dissent which they resolve between themselves — I think the degree of "shut the fuck up" between them is not the same as "shut the fuck up" towards a total stranger — and a third person jumps into it and starts sermons about "the tone" and "toxicity", then this third person deserves every bit of beating and shaming. Because it's both arrogant and toxic to jump into argument that is not your fucking business.
