I switched newspapers when I noticed that every time my newspaper write about something I actually knew about, they wrote garbage.
Sapiens does present some really powerful ideas, though. I enjoyed it a lot, but the book clearly glosses over a lot of details. Then again, it tries to tackle a ridiculously big scope, so I can see how it can’t get into all of the details. I still consider it a worthy read despite its shortcomings. But read it more for the ideas than for the facts.
Googling stuff online doesn’t make you a programmer either. You still have to learn it, know how to apply what you look up, understand how the computer works. Although it’s easier to learn by yourself, at least partially because there are no lives at stake.
And doctors look up plenty of stuff too. Only a fool would think they already know everything.
Not all NoSQL databases are the same. Neo4j is acid compliant, and lightning fast for complex relationships that relational databases struggle with.
VS is itself short for Visual Studio, the first IDE I ever used, and the first MS product I liked. So VS Code Studio means Visual Studio Code Studio.
Why Visual? Because 25 years ago MS was pushing Visual C++, where you would drag and drop visual components together and then figure out where to put the C++ code to make them work.
Yeah, real shame Maemo never got anywhere. I really liked the idea.
All these tech giants have their own area where they are the absolute worst, and other areas where they’re not as bad as some of the others.
Apple sucks on app store restrictions, but on the desktop OS, the respect user privacy more than Google and MS do. Google is the absolute worst on ads, tracking and using search to leverage their monopoly, but they’ve also made a ton of cool stuff, including Android. MS makes the worst piece of shit OS and forces everybody to use it while they make it worse, but I’m sure there’s also something they do right.
I like the idea, but I’m annoyed by the inconsistency.
The þ is the th sound in “both”, but not the th sound in “the”; that’s a ð.
Ðough, ðat, ðere
Þorough, boþ, þree
Dude, if you’re going to do this, you should really be spelling ‘that’ like ðat.
Why?
This is exactly it. It has always been up to the browser to decide how to render a website. There have always been differences. The idea that a browser can honour or ignore parts of the content has always been part of it.
If anything should be illegal, it should be websites 's constant attempts to bypass user preferences. Some of that shit is plain malware.
That’s not what I picked up from it. The biggest idea that it presents very early in the book is that of a shared subjective truth: most of the things that make up our society, like countries, laws, corporations, etc. do not exist objectively; they only exist because we all believe in them. Objectively, these things don’t exist, but our society is built upon everybody agreeing that these imaginary orders exist, and we’re constantly inventing new imaginary structures on top of that.