aordano's comments

I know that was why i said name/logo :P

I saw the similarity, wrote "joost" and saw it was the same.

Love your name/logo :)

Installing updates in the background requires special permissions that require google's blessing. For now, the workaround is a Magisk/Xposed/Lsposed module to give those low level permissions to the F-Droid app.

Disclaimer: I am transgender and i have done actual research on transgenderism a couple years back.

I have seen this firsthand on some acquaintances. Social media has a massive influence on people and there are some persons specifically that have a weaker sense of identity (usually associated with poor development or some mental disorder like schizophrenia, STPD, or BPD), and those persons can be influenced to the point of actually, legit molding their own identity by their own media consumption.

This consumption in most people only plants seeds that will lead to questioning or trying stuff, but won't have a long-lasting impact on their core identity. So for most people this kind of exposition will be something either transitory or will just provide awareness. People grow out of it and it actually it's "just a phase" for many.

So yes people can learn to have a new identity if they don't have a strong core identity formed yet or if it is weak or broken enough.

OTOH, i am unsure what do you mean by a statistical over-representation of GD. There are no bounds set for deviation of the norm for the general population (i.e. normalized rate of growth of % of population that is transgender is not an outlier vs the rate of growth of other emergent behaviors afforded by greater overall inclusion and reduction of discrimination). The places where it is statistically over-represented, like on people within the Autism Spectrum, are under investigation.

In any case the risks of social media brainwashing are not restricted to stuff like disorders but go way beyond and i think the solution to this stuff is, like for many other things, more education and awareness of risks, tradeoffs, what is gender, what is identity, and how they work both intrinsically and within the bounds of social interactions.

Location: South America

Remote: Preferably

Willing to relocate: Yes

Technologies: TypeScript, Node, AWS, DevOps, Automation, Rust, Systems

Résumé/CV: https://cv.choccymilk.dev/cv.pdf

Email: [email protected]

I'm a a 3yoe full-stack developer, great for small startups, and mostly oriented to frontend modern tech. Worked in cloud design and deployment, some of the business side of development, and all the common tech for a complete stack.

As sibling comments said, 50% faster means adding 50% of the nominal speed, so it's 1.5x the original magnitude.

200% faster means 3x the nominal speed:

You're adding speed ("going faster").

You're adding a 200% of speed, which is twice the nominal speed (the 100%). Given the nominal speed is 1x and you're adding 2x, you end with triple the magnitude of the original nominal speed.

If you're on 110V you should care about the current limits

Most comments here seem to lean a lot into the lawfulness aspect and that the individuals should be prosecuted, but the platform should be left to its own devices.

But the fat is that organizing criminal activities is a criminal activity! Having a whole platform where there is rampant, blessed-by-the-mods organized crime is not something acceptable. Even if you give credence to the idea that this activity is not representative of the platform as a whole, it is responsibility of the platform to prevent crime being harbored there, just like in any other business.

Morals and ethics are a complex thing, impossible to "solve" in a perfect way, and both restriction and freedom have their costs and benefits for everyone. Maybe instead of understanding this events as the demise of freedom, we could understand them better as a way to learn --as a society-- how to manage this balance properly.

- There also is Paxos[0] as the most significant option.

- You should not have too many nodes to make a decision, this is usually reserved for leaders; if you have a large distributed system you may clusterize them or forward decisions to leaders, whom decide for consensus. If you clusterize, the leaders for each node can also be selected by consensus. If you can't do any of those then having a consensus protocol might not even be a good idea; you'd end up with a sort of merkle tree (or some sort of blockchain) to make sure all the data is registered, or maybe audit transactions. In any case this[1] might be interesting.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paxos_(computer_science) [1] https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2016.10.011

First, sorry for being so rude in my previous comment, and what i might put here. There is a lot of misinformation out there (and in the article) and it hurts people in very tangible ways. Stigma and misinformation can very literally kill.

There is a lot of inaccurate information, and a lot of unknowns being taken as fact in this article.

For starters, almost any model of the mind based on ideas of wither Freud or Jung have been thoroughly... i won't say "disproven" because there is no proof for any of this within reach of humanity so far, but they are effectively useless. Those models don't account for a lot of things, lead to wrong outcomes in others, and overall they are a bad way to describe what's going on inside the psyche of a person.

Some characteristics of those models can be inherited into newer models, but basing anything off them will lead to routes that won't be representative of the way the mind of a person works, whether is neurotypical or not.

Having this in the middle of the article demolishes whatever credence one might hope to sustain about what it further develops.

As you point out, the "voices" that schizophrenic people might hear are not a simple auditory hallucination; though just saying it's reasonable to say they are actual selves is taking an idea in a very simplistic way. Here is where the issue begins, a person not versed whatsoever in psychology reads the article and believes as gospel what is said here in a very simplified way, the nuance is lost in the middle.

Whether the voices of a person with schizophrenia, schizotypal disorder, or schizoaffective disorder might actually be discriminated as having the same qualities as a disembodied being, is dependent on the specifics on the case, how is it treated, and how other comorbidities might interact with it. Things regarding mental illnesses are extremely messy and extremely hard to grasp even for trained professionals with specific experience in the area (years to find a psychiatrist qualified enough to treat my partner. years!).

The article contains a lot more bad sources, inaccurate understanding of the self and the inner dialogue (that not even everyone has) and has a haphazard mixture between pop-psych and neuroscience that conflates things that are pertinent to a certain domain as generalizable or universal.

I'm sorry but this is not good and it's not as simple as correcting a thing or two about schizophrenia, because when i read the whole thing it screams "i don't really know what i'm talking about but i will throw a bunch of sources and topics and pretend i do". Maybe you're knowledgeable about this stuff and just the process of simplifying things for the article butchered everything, or maybe you don't really have much idea about what you're writing. In any case if you want i can give you some books/papers/sources, or chat about the subject, feel free to contact me.

And again, sorry for being so rude earlier.

The perspective presented re: schizophrenia is awful too.

The author appears to be very ignorant of the last 20? 30? years of research in both schizophrenia and DID. I can tell just at a glance both by having professional experience in those areas, and by having to deal with both disorders of them every day (my life partner has both DID and schizophrenia).

Making this sort of publications without actually acquainting with the state of the art is dangerous, reckless, and frankly just plain insulting.

Freudian/Jungian psychology and its derivatives have done enough damage already, let them die.

Completely agree. You don't even have to go much further than reading the title with some more intent; How is having a "Clear and Simple Design" not a way of architecting a project?

I have two NVIDIA GPUs in my main machine, and last year i set up a box with three GPUs, all NVIDIA, for a multiseat config. The box worked just fine both in multihead as in multiseat.

NVIDIA can be a pain, but most of the wrinkles are ironed out, unless you have very old (or very new) cards

For anyone curious, check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rankine_cycle

Concrete, coarse finish

Location: South America Remote: Preferably Willing to relocate: Yes Technologies: TypeScript, Node, AWS, DevOps, Automation, Rust, Systems Résumé/CV: https://cv.choccymilk.dev/cv.pdf Email: [email protected]

I'm a a 3yoe full-stack developer, great for small startups, and mostly oriented to frontend modern tech. Worked in cloud design and deployment, some of the business side of development, and all the common tech for a complete stack.

Yes, developer experience. I thought it was a common term, maybe not so much.

And I agree, it's a great term :)

Gulp is practical to insert extra behavior if you have a multi-step build process and are allergic to Webpack. Just write a gulpfile and spawn whatever you need spawning, like some glorified bash that is already in JS so you don't need to manage more languages.

This reminds me so much of MithrilJS, and i also remember how terribly unergonomic it was, a terrible DX. The Vite JSX plugin is nice tho, I can see myself using this for something, but i will probably get tired of the ergonomics once i hit some complex component.

I am currently in early stages of writing a lightweight reactive framework more of the likes of Alpine and there are some things in this source that can prove fruitful. The rendering process is one of the most interesting things here imo.