It’s all variable, and highly dependent on the languages you use, the types of applications you develop, your personal workflows, what you learned with and got used to as you were learning to program, and a myriad of other factors. Painting in broad strokes, like what the meme is doing or what you’re doing, is almost never correct. There’s always nuance.

LMAO the next action taken after that comment:

microsoft locked and limited conversation to collaborators

It adds nothing to the conversation

Lmao what a useless comment right here

I really want you to understand that no one in this thread is out to get you

What?

I’m not asking you to feel shame, just explaining why I thought your comment was deserving of a downvote. It wasn’t intended to be personal, just informational.

I’ll be honest, I downvoted you, but because of the incredibly condescending tone, and for arguing against a point that literally no one has brought up in this post. I’m sorry you’ve run into dumbasses elsewhere that have wrongly tried to claim Steam isn’t a monopoly, but complaining about them and arguing against them in a post that they haven’t shown up in isn’t productive.

Yeah I don’t think anyone can form a good faith argument claiming Steam doesn’t have a monopoly.

The thing is, all a competitor has to do to take away Steam’s monopoly is to make a product as good or better than Steam

my grandmas cinci style chili

You wanna hook us up with the recipe, or is that one a tightly guarded secret?

It was enshittified into that. A decade ago, it was a perfectly fine option for people that wanted a more convenient, hassle-free way to share and collaborate on code

What do you mean by “changing the layout”, going from QWERTY to Dvorak, or something like switching between English and Chinese glyphs? Both are possible at least in software. Technically you can move around/replace keycaps to match your layout too, but obviously that would be super inconvenient to do regularly

I hope you’re this pedantic when people ask for a Kleenex or a q-tip, or when they use Velcro

It’s Canonical’s (the company that created/updates/supports Ubuntu) package format. There are a few problems.

They can only be hosted on proprietary Canonical servers. That sort of flies in the face of one of the “free” aspects of Linux. Canonical is also sort of fostering a reputation of abandoning/massively changing something core in Ubuntu every couple major releases, which has made some wary of depending on snaps, since if Canonical decides to stop hosting them, anyone dependent on them is kinda screwed. Snaps can also chew up disk space if you’re not careful. I don’t think that’s necessarily unique to snaps, but in my experience that issue has been worse with snaps than with comparable alternatives like flatpaks.

Is this a fresh new copypasta, or are you just a really long-winded, elaborate troll?

They’re not a replacement for a regular vacuum/broom, they’re a supplement. This is like complaining that the washing machine can’t completely remove red wine stains by itself. And there are robot vacuums at every price point, just like normal vacuums.

I’m glad you can vacuum your whole house in 10 minutes, but the rest of us don’t live in a shoebox and have pets with fur. You making judgments on a person’s character based on the chores they want to make easier speaks volumes about the type of person you are, you soggy walnut.

Ugh. Stop shaming people for wanting to automate mundane tasks. No one’s playing a stupid game here, the problem isn’t robot vacuums. The problem is that manufacturers insist on holding features hostage on the basis that you connect said vacuum to the Internet, so they can harvest (and then sell) your data. Be mad at that, not at normal people wanting to make a boring chore less burdensome.

You’re absolutely correct that Korea (and Vietnam I suppose, I don’t know much about their language) invented their alphabet to make literacy more accessible, and I think that’s awesome and a really good feature of alphabet systems. I can even see why that would make people prefer alphabet systems, since accessibility is super important when you’re first learning a language.

I think your cached vs. real-time analogy is spot on. And while you can definitely come up with scenarios where caching is better than real-time rendering, and other scenarios where real-time rendering is better than caching, it’d be difficult to argue that one is unequivocally better or worse than the other.

Sure, I agree that alphabet systems are initially easier to learn than logographic systems. But to achieve that they sacrifice the consistency and lack of ambiguity of a logographic system. It’s funny you bring up Korean as an example of a good alphabet system, because I can assure you as someone who is currently learning Korean, it has it’s weird spelling inconsistencies and pronunciation “rules” and exceptions, just like any other alphabet system.

And again, I’m not trying to convince you that one is better than the other. My whole point is that one isn’t any better or worse than another. They each have their own strengths, weaknesses, and specific purposes, they’re both functional, one isn’t better or worse than the other as a whole.

Agree you’ve covered some of the pros of alphabet systems and cons of logographic systems, and those are totally valid. You’re neglecting the other sides though, so let’s balance that out:

Here’s some pros of logographic systems:

• Higher information density - you can say more with less, and readers can parse it faster

• Compound words are intuitive - just put the symbols for the two halves of the words next to each other (or visually combine them in some cases)

• Symbols have direct meaning - there is usually no “sounding out” words to figure out what they mean, the symbol by itself fully encapsulates meaning, independent of pronunciation

• Because meaning is independent from phonetics, ambiguity is reduced with homophones, in that two words that sound the same still have two different-looking symbols

• Written communication can still be understood even across different dialects, and even across different languages altogether, if the same logographic system is used, and even if those logographic symbols have different pronunciations. This separation makes it possible to communicate across language barriers without having to learn a whole other language.

• Logographic systems don’t have to adapt to changes in pronunciation over time, they’re stable

Here’s some cons of alphabet systems:

• Much lower information density takes longer to read, most people have to internally convert the visual data to sound to understand it, so it physically takes more brainpower/effort to understand written text

• Wild inconsistencies in phonetics within a language, requiring rote memorization of spelling “rules” and all of their various exceptions. Makes learning new words difficult as you can’t be sure if you’re “sounding it out” correctly unless you’ve heard the spoken word

• Meaning directly depends on phonetics/pronunciation, which can lead to confusion and ambiguity with alternate pronunciations, alternate spellings, and differing dialects (e.g. Canadian French vs. Metropolitan French)

• Learning a language that uses an alphabet system means learning it twice - the written language and the spoken language

• Homophones and hereronyms? Good luck

Also here’s some food for thought. I 100% guarantee you use a logographic system every single day, very easily, without even realizing it. In fact, nearly the whole world uses it - Arabic numerals.