Legianus

u/Legianus@programming.dev
0 posts · 103 comments

Recent posts

No posts.

Recent comments

on Cardio-mogged · c/memes · 1 pts · 12d

Yes a bit more actually. I answered in more detail to another comment in this thread. Also like another comment said the reporting on it all is a bit nebulous, too.

on Cardio-mogged · c/memes · 3 pts · 12d

Everyone is ignorant in some way though, you cannot know it all.

The full story is that before the Battle of Marathon, Pheidippides ran around 240 km to Sparta to ask for aid in the upcoming battle and then back to bring their message. He then fought a probably exhaustive battle and then ran to Athens (if I am not mistaken) to tell them of the victory, adding ~ 42 km more.

So in total he ran around 524 km. Not sure in what time exactly, but I assume he wasn't tardy. Then he died of exhaustion.

By the way, the run to Sparta is, since a few RAF officers did it after WW2, now also a race and your name gets put on a slab of rock somewhere.

on Cardio-mogged · c/memes · 15 pts · 12d

Doubt that many people do. He ran 480 km, participated in the battle of Marathon and then ran ~42 km after and died.

Denke es läuft dann eher drauf hinaus, dass Leute Zeit haben auf was anderes umzuschulen. Derzeit ist es schwer ohne Geld oder mit Arbeitslosengeld wirklich sein Feld zu wechseln. Vor allem in einer Welt die tendenziell dazu über geht "einfache" jobs wegzuautomatisieren. Man braucht also immer mehr Zeit fürs umschulen.

Da würde doch unbedingtes Grundeinkommen als Überbrückung helfen oder?

Plus das würde dann auch weniger die Allgemeinheit tragen als dass man mal Maschinen und so auch besteuern müsste. Gerade wird hauptsächlich Arbeit oder der Ertrag aus dieser besteuert. Wenn man das jetzt wegautomatisiert und nicht besteuert fehlt das schlichtweg.

on Not a single one · c/science_memes · 2 pts · 19d

I wouldn't say it is identical. Nuclear is far easier to solve. The waste is really not that impactful in comparison to climate change

on Not a single one · c/science_memes · 6 pts · 19d

I wasn't talking about building new ones. I agree with that. But the ones that already exist shouldn't be shut down until they are replaced by renewables.

on Not a single one · c/science_memes · 44 pts · 19d

Even if this were true, would that be important nowadays? If it can push out climate change and make it into a problem to solve later (in case of fission). Fusion would be great though

Have you looked at any populist movement in the world? Anyone likes easy solutions and being told their often multiple fears/worries/problems have one definite source. That is the populist playbook and has happened again and again over hundreds of years, irrespective of actual systems of Government. I think that is something very human that can only be beaten with education, imo.

on 😼 · c/lemmyshitpost · 21 pts · 33d

Online chess notation for move precision. !! brilliant, book is literature move, thumbs up an checkmark are good moves, star very good, roughly.

Eventuell ist das ja in wärmeren Regionen der Fall. Früher war so was in DE schlicht nicht relevant, also würde das kein Bauingenieur berücksichtigen, oder?

Zudem kann es neue Erfindungen/Fortschritt geben die vorher nicht benutzt/angewendet wurden oder Dinge die evtl. wiederentdeckt wurden?

Gibt doch so viele Gründe warum man was macht was früher nicht gemacht wurde.

Well no, the terminal is a software like any other. It just is sometimes more final about doing things (e.g. rm <file> will delete without asking twice) and you cab start other software from it or use within.

There are multiple layers between you and your hardware, rings of userspace (Starting with Ring 3) and at the end Kernel (Ring 0)

Also one-wings are notoriously hard to fly and B-52's are actively supporting the pilot (via computers) to even make it operational for a human, if I don't misremember. So maybe that failed?

Having passive assistance that couldn't fail would actually be a great thing an bring one-wing designs into the commercial aviation.

Edit: I was mistakenly speaking about a (rather) modern bomber B2. Mistook it for the B-52, which isn't a one-wing and built not long after the second world war.

I am not telling you what to believe and that was not my intention, if that seemed to be the case then I am sorry. Although, regardless of what you believe, it seemed like you 100 % believed the article and argued for it (and against other commenters). Your approach was too direct then I guess, I also misunderstood your intention.

In comments/writing it is/can be really hard to be nuanced. As seen from our above misunderstanding even. I guess starting of your comment with something alike "The article seems to contradict your statement in these points... What do you make of this?" Would have made your openness to discuss clear right away. Otherwise it came of as directly opposing.