I loved Pirates! and spend so many hours as a teenager playing it. Not mentioned in the article was the soundtrack- it did a great job of keeping you immersed and the sound chips of the day did a good job with the symthesized harpsichord.
Important to remember that this style of writing originates well before the AI era. It's called direct mail marketing. It's the same style of writing you'd read when you got your physical junk mail from your physical mailbox and made the mistake of opening it.
LinkedIn shows me there are whole parts of our industry I never work with.
Long time programmers saw striver kids replaced computer kids. But their level of competency in technical companies is generally high. On the other side of the fence though is “the industry” which now employs a large part of the general population. And frankly they aren’t very smart in combination with not being a part of computer culture.
This has shown up on LinkedIn as “programmer influencers” who write in an extremely immature and unprofessional way, while also not saying anything interesting or smart. They write in ways I’ve never seen people write and it’s not AI or social media.
The problem isn't this, its enough people actually consuming it. These things always follow money first. Blame those people and appeal to them if you think it will change something, not venting off here among folks who are hardly the main source of this.
No, I don't have the solution for this age of dumb. It used to be that people were ashamed of how primitive they are, now they celebrate it as openly as possible and non-trivial amounts of similar folks follow.
Oh jeez, I cannot wait for the Words. Standing. Alone. trend to be over, it makes me want to hurl.
It sorta made sense when it was clever and the words actually made sense both alone or together, but now that it's become something every two-bit marketroid aims for, they force it even when it doesn't really work, and the result is atrocious.
Makes me yearn for pet rocks. At least that fad knew it was dumb.
Of course that’s a silly turn of phrase but there is a grain of truth.
Most people believe that the law should mirror the ethics or morality of the society, and absent something clearly harmful, most people don’t understand why something with nobody clearly harmed should be illegal.
Of course the government has permission to punish crime. However government officials might find themselves in a courtroom having to demonstrate how they applied the law equally, and would be subject to discovery to see if they were being corruptly influenced (there is organization and international funding for the anti-data center movement in the US”; there is very little grassroots opposition other than typical NIMBYism you see in all development projects).
And the government would have to pay to fight and might be on the hook if they lost.
And “clearly breaking the law” isn’t always clear; I don’t k ow anything about this particular case but it sounds like zoning or applying utility laws to non-utility companies or environmental regulations being used to make construction financially untenable. I don’t have a lot of sympathy for opposition to off-grid natural gas turbines; you don’t get much cleaner off grid power that works 24x7.
> government officials might find themselves in a courtroom having to demonstrate how they applied the law equally
The government has no obligation to apply the law equally, although they are prohibited from applying the law unequally to achieve certain discriminatory aims.
“Applied the law equally” referred to politicians- did they allow something in some cases but not others, eg “selective enforcement”.
Your response was “I’d like to live in your world”, implying that you believe that it’s rarely the case that people can get government officials on the stand. That’s true for most people, but not true for people with deep pockets for lawyers.
I brought up Musk because Starlink was mentioned as the data center owner.
I do believe that you get more justice if you can afford to fight the government on its own terms in a courtroom. I don’t celebrate that.
> However government officials might find themselves in a courtroom having to demonstrate how they applied the law equally, and would be subject to discovery to see if they were being corruptly influenced (there is organization and international funding for the anti-data center movement in the US”
> Americans hate data centers. They really, really hate them.
A Gallup poll from May found that 71 percent of Americans would oppose a data center being built in their area. In rural communities in Utah and North Carolina, regular people are organizing to stop data center construction, speaking out at public hearings and pressuring politicians for bans....
> According to polling by Heatmap News, more than half of all Americans support a national ban on data centers. The public seems to agree that data centers are giant, ugly, noisy, smelly altars to industrial-scale hostile architecture. In our virulently partisan country, this constitutes a rare show of consensus.
reply