What a convenient method!

I've always done the "look at a clock twice" thing, but...

Different time? Huh, the clock must be broken. Cool.

No clocks here. Whatever, I'm probably not dreaming.

Haha

Oh I love the "walk me through what I'm about to do" concept. Dry runs should be more common -- especially in shell scripts...

The world would be a better place if every install.sh had a --help, some nice printf's saying "Moving this here" / "Overwrite? [Y/N]", and perhaps even a shoehorned-in set -x.

Hope your r/w wasn't eaten up by the subfolder incident (that I presume happened) :P

It's scientifically defined (Woods, 2023).

https://doi.org/10.1080/03626784.2023.2272988

I propose a definition of shitposting that embodies four distinct elements: a reliance on absurdity or “meaninglessness,” the critique or disruption of online discourses, the employment of an “internet ugly” aesthetic, and the use of meta-languaging.

Meaninglessness/absurdity - There's no intrinsic meaning in the content, but there is in said content's circulation. Shitposts "mock", "denigrate", "construct an image of authenticity", and "accrue social capital" (he probably means upvotes or Discord reactions)

Disruption - It can be used politically, e.g. the alt-right drowning out opponents, or just plain derailment, using "ironic references... to confound commentary or analysis" (he uses a Twitter example in the article -- i.e. among the "Here's what I did today!" there's a Jon Arbuckle of in of out, and it disrupts your train of thought)

Internet ugly aesthetic - Kinda obvious. Motion blur on a plastic bag sort of stuff. But he diagnoses an internet-queasiness I didn't know I had: "[shitposting] provides a critique of the overly streamlined information ecosystem of the internet... an imposition of messy humanity... on smooth gradients, blemish correcting Photoshop, and AutoCorrect"

Meta-languaging - Well, memes evolve. It's part of their meaningless-content meaningful-use interaction. Like a meme with a random Subway sandwich on it, obviously insanely edited over repeatedly.

Actually a really interesting read. The man quotes dril and talks about how he started a small movement where "corncobbing" was an insult.

I think I disagree with a lot of the comments here. The "trying to sound smart" feeling only really occurs when there's a mismatch in decorum -- someone is trying to appear Higher and More Logical -- but that can happen with any word, especially adverbs.

Technically, your argument is fallacious.

"Technically" is a useless crutch word (techy!), and "fallacious" is hella overused outside of formal logic stuff, so here it's a mismatch in decorum. (What's the fallacy? Does the other just... disagree with you, or are you using a converse error like A implies B, therefore B implies A?)

Well, you don't always have to do that, per se, but you can irregardless.

A lot of crutch words are just innocent habits, too. masterspace@lemmy.ca mentioned something like that... though there are always people who up their jargon levels for no reason other than To Be More L33t. ~and_screw_irregardless~

On the other hand, some words commented here are needed. For example, if a reviewer calls Grossman's The Magicians "erudite", it fits perfectly -- the book

Continuing on that feeling of summed-up-in-one-word-ness -- what alternatives do we really have for "whataboutism" or the "algorithm" or "milquetoast"? Those words hit hard, they sum things up.

The algorithm is an alt-right pipeline, of course he'll have that phase.

Great, another video on the most milquetoast youtuber drama I've ever heard.

Those words are concise, they roll off the tongue and evoke feeling! Don't shorten words just to sound more colloquial when you have a choice that really fits! And likewise, equally -- don't be grandiloquent just for the sake of it.

Or else you'll face floccinaucinihilipilification :3

The depth of a dive is always delightful! Does K8s have a solid use-case for the project or did you just sK8 for fun?

Round two, hell yeah.

The aesthetica of a stack of notes, born from a "dead end", is secretly an odd motivator. You look back and see

Here is the breadth of what we did wrong.

and then beyond you, the effort lays itself out in a pretty trusswork.

_~or_maybe_i_just_think_well-used_notebooks_are_pretty~

Hah, stochastic parrots.

Makes me wonder. Every laziness I've had with the vector guessers, I've seen an exact counterweight.

One, you can invoke more often (throw ChatGPT configs against the wall until it doesn't error); the other you can invoke more deeply. So I can't help but wonder -- when we cancel out all the terms -- if the timesaving sum is positive or negative. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Bending the question a little but my second "first impression" of Arch's "simplicity" surprised me the most.

I was running Gentoo for a while before deciding to move back, and I was surprised that somehow I had

• saved space
• gotten faster at doing new things (...)
• didn't lose any boot speed or anything like that

Granted, I had jumped on Gentoo because of misconceptions (speed, ricing, the idea that I needed USE flags), but going back, I saw things more clearly:

• the AUR being basically a shell script download + 300 MB of base-devel was simpler and more space-efficient than /var/db/repos (IIRC -- since the portage and guru ebuilds were all held locally anyway after syncing, an on-demand AUR saved space).
  • the simple automatic build file audits on Arch felt more clean to me. I like checking my build files; had to make a script for the guru ebuild equivalent (but maybe there's a portage arg i missed somewhere -- wouldn't be the first time)
• Arch repos separating parts of packages in case you don't need some part (like splitting some font into its languages, or splitting a package into x and x-doc and x-perl) was almost a simple USE flag-ish thing already
• /etc/makepkg.conf was Gentoo's make.conf. And its build flags looked similar to the CFLAGS I manually set up anyway.
• My boot time (btrfs inside LUKS with encrypted /boot) was the same with systemd vs. openrc
• I realized I liked systemd (because of the completeness of my systemctl muscle memory, like with systemctl status and journalctl, or managing systemd-logind instead of using seatd and friends).

Not bashing on Gentoo or anything, but it's when I realized why Arch was "simple." Even me sorely missing /etc/portage/patches was quelled by paru -S <pkg> --fm vim --savechanges.

And Arch traveling at the speed of simplicity even quantifiably helped: Had to download aur/teams the other day with nine-minute warning.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Successful GitHub pulls are rare; more often, patches live like this. You're better off contacting the maintainer of the subsystem you're editing. See the official submission guide.

Not to be dejecting!

The "we have more than 5 senses" insistence, while interesting, misconstrues what is typically understood as a "sense" by the average person.

When children are taught what the 5 senses are, i.e. seeing, hearing, touch, taste and smell, these are more literary senses than scientific ones. (In another vein, it's like disagreeing whether a tomato is a vegetable, fruit, or both -- scientists and cooks have different definitions!)

Proprioception, the unconscious spatial perception of your body parts, falls under "feel." Hunger and thirst do, too. I feel hungry, I feel that my leg is below me, I feel off-balance. These scientifically-defined senses fall under one literary sense or another.

Since this is just a mangling of definitions, it's almost irresponsible to call the five-senses thing a misconception. That being said, it did interest me; did you know that endolymph fluid in our ears uses its inertia to tell us what's going on when we turn our heads? ツ

Stunningly simple, solely a shift. I love MVPs... we can possibly even remove the -P completion func switch :P

At a level that the user doesn't have much control over, I fear both stock systems are about the same in terms of privacy.

According to an analysis by Köllnig et al. (2021) on 500k+ free Google Play/App Store apps, tracker libraries such as Google Play Services/Apple's SKAdNetwork/cross-platform libraries are used in about equal percentages on both app stores' free apps. These free apps' trackers are generally not configured to follow GDPR data-minimization practices, even for kids' apps, but it's to be noted that Android has a disadvantage in that advertising ID is more used in Android apps than Apple apps. However, Apple has disadvantage too: the researchers noted that Android's intent system and different permission model makes apps seem "more privileged" than Apple's, but Apple makes accurate analysis of their apps' reach difficult, judging by the larger failure rate in app decompilation as well as the more opaque approach to permission disclosure. Although the paper might imply Apple has improved over time, since it mentions Apple's implementation of opt-in tracking in 2021, after the study, as a limitation, keep in mind Apple's new movement towards advertising as a form of revenue, as discussed by Apple Insider (Owen, 2022) and Bloomberg (Gurman, 2022).

Of course, Köllnig's study only reflects tracking in "curated apps" for either platform. It does not discuss hardware/firmware/system app-level privacy, which users have little control over (Leith, 2021 -- easier reading with TomsGuide). Leith found that either OS phones home (lol) every ~4.5 minutes, and even though Google may send more data (even from the clock app!), Apple profiles your social network via MAC addresses on your Wi-Fi as well as location geotagging, which the TomsGuide article called "quality vs. quantity". This builds on the idea that Apple might seem more private, but only ostensibly so, judging by these more particular looks at their data collection and the trend of their increasingly data-focused business model.

Does that mean the choices between stock OS don't matter? Well, no -- as for me, who can't afford a Pixel anytime soon, I've chosen Android on account of freedom outside of curated app stores. Yes, PrivacyGuides may not recommend F-Droid, but the opportunity cost in security there may be negligible compared to the convenient and easily-handled privacy received in exchange*, at least for typical less-savvy threat models like my own. (This favorability is illustrated in a forum debate here (Lukas, 2023), though in a context less relevant to stock OS comparisons.) Ignoring the facet of freedom with stock Android, the possibility of large privacy advantage one way or the other, strictly in terms of stock Android and stock iOS operating systems, is marginal if it even exists.