8 billion of us

None of whom can make it stop at 99,999,999.99.

Make it stop at 99,999,999.99

Nobody can do that.

Am I doomed

year 12

No.

What can I do to save him?

Just curious what makes you think there’s something you could do that would save him?

video games … we’ve wasted a lot of time on something that has little to no value

Fun has value. Joy has value. Pleasure has value. Indeed, one could even argue that they’re the only things that do have value.

until he got into office this third term

Uhhhh… eh?

“Magic Mushroom” Compound

DMT

LOL magic mushrooms contain psilocybin, not DMT

No sources. Violating rule 9.

Link to the mailing list message: https://lore.kernel.org/amd-gfx/[email protected]/

“Senior Product Manager, AI”

I’m not God’s gift to the field, but I am clearly better than most of my competition

Stopped reading there.

This comment thread is about your opinion on the developers wanting to gain renumeration for their efforts.

No it’s about the Home Assistant developers valuing profit over well engineered software.

I’d say they are focussed on making well engineered software over making money.

I think you must have a different idea of what “well engineered software” means because to me, nothing you’ve said implies a focus on making well engineered software.

Writing software without remuneration doesn’t imply a focus on well engineered software. A person can write software without remuneration with a focus on anything, not necessarily good engineering. For example, one can write software without remuneration with a focus on financial reward in future. Which is exactly what appears to have happened. Working without pay to build a business with the expectation that the business will be profitable in future doesn’t imply that the business will be built on good engineering.

Helping secure remote access for those who don’t know how to do it themselves doesn’t imply a focus on well engineered software. Educating people isn’t the same thing as engineering software, let alone engineering software well. Ease of use isn’t the same thing as good engineering; one can engineer easy to use software well and one can engineer easy to use software poorly. Nabu Casa Inc. have done the latter.

Eh?

The software is free, but no dev works for free.

It’s possible to engineer software well and still earn a living.

That said, engineering software poorly is often a choice, usually made by people who are poor engineers. In some cases, and I suspect this may be the case for Nabu Casa Inc., the people are such poor engineers that they aren’t even aware that their software is poorly engineered. Many technology companies are better at business than they are engineering.

Edit: actually no, I don’t think Nabu Casa Inc. are unaware of their poor engineering, I think they just don’t care. They’re far more concerned with maintaining their company’s profits.

Why so negative?

It’s clear that the Nabu Casa Inc. people, who also happen to be the Home Assistant project leaders, are focussed on making money over making well engineered software.

For example, Home Assistant’s settings page includes an entry for Nabu Casa Inc.'s cloud services product as the first entry in the list and there’s no option to switch it off.

Home Assistant is engineered in such a way as to make it difficult to install on operating systems that aren’t under control of Nabu Casa Inc., like Home Assistant OS or Home Assistant Container. If Home Assistant were engineered well, it would be simple to take individual Home Assistant packages and build and install them on any distribution, as has been customary in the free software community for decades. As far as I know, there’s no reason Home Assistant must be an operating system rather than simply individual packages. See https://feddit.uk/post/17543373 and especially https://feddit.uk/post/17543373/12207671 .

Bands also makes merch to increase their income, should we hate on them as well?

If a band makes selling merch their purpose, over and above making decent music, then I would likewise scorn them.

Oh, and before I forget: have you seen our brand new merch store?

🤮

“It’s my data centre!”

“No it’s MINE!!”

I’d recommend this excellent series if you want a good grounding:

https://www.rigb.org/explore-science/explore/video/arrows-time-back-future-1999

And I also found this video which I haven’t watched but I expect will be good and probably attacks your pondering more directly:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5_0o2fJhtSc

Hence, the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness.

One paper claiming that the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness does not mean that the Orch OR model is not a feasible explanation of the origin of consciousness.

it seems my memory is better than yours

I’m not sure why you think my memory is in any way relevant.

Published 13 August, 2009

There’s a significant journey from being published in a paper to being taught in classes. I was taught Orch OR somewhere between 2008 and 2010 so there’s no reason to think memory comes into it.