Join devRant
Do all the things like
++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatar
Sign Up
Pipeless API
From the creators of devRant, Pipeless lets you power real-time personalized recommendations and activity feeds using a simple API
Learn More
Search - "discourse"
-
Fuck brand builders, or, how I learned to start giving a shit and love devrant.
Brand builders are people who generally have very little experience and are attempting to obfuscate their dearth of ability behind a wall of non-academic content generation. Subscribe, like, build a following and everyone will happily overlook the fact that your primary contribution to society is spreading facile content that further obfuscates the need for fundamentals. Their carefully crafted presence is designed promote themselves and their success while chipping away at the apparent value of professional ability. At one point, I thought medium would be the bottom of the barrel; a glorified blog that provides people with scant knowledge, little experience and routinely low integrity a platform to build an echo chamber of replayed or copied content, techno-mysticism and best-practice-superstition they mistake for a brand in an environment where there's little chance of peer review. I thought it couldn't get any worse.
Then I found dev.to
Dev.to is what happens when all the absence of ability and skills insecurity on the internet gets together to form a censorship mob to ensure that no criticism, reality or peer review will ever filter into the ramblings of people intent on forever remaining at the peak of the dunning-kreuger curve. It's the long tail of YMCA trophy culture.
Take for example this article:
https://dev.to/davidepacilio/...
It's a shit post listicle by someone claiming to be "senior," who confidently states that "you are only as good as the tools you use." Meanwhile all the great minds of history are giving him the side-eye because they understand tools are just a magnifier of ability. If you're an amazing carpenter, power tools will help you produce at an exponential rate. If you're a shitty carpenter, your work will still be shit, there will just be more of it. The actual phrase that's being butchered here is "you're only as good as the tools you create." There's no moral superiority to be had in being dependent on a tool, that's just a crutch. A true expert or professional is someone who can create tools to aid in their craft. Being a professional is having a thorough enough understanding of the thing you are doing so as to be able to craft force multipliers that make your work easier, not just someone who uses them.
Ok, so what?
I'm sure he's a plenty fine human to grab drinks with, no ill will to him as a human. That said, were you to comment something to that effect on dev.to, you'd be reported by all the hangers-on pretty much immediately, regardless of how much complimentary padding and passive, welcoming language you wrap your message in. The problem with a bunch of weak people ganging up on the voice of reason and deciding they don't want things like constructive criticism, peer review, academic process or the scientific method is, after you remove all of that, you're just left with a formless sea of ideas and thoughts with no categorization, no order. You find a lot of opinions and nothing to challenge them and thereby are left with no mechanism for strong ideas to rise to the top. In that system, the "correct" ideas are by default those posited by the strongest personality.
We all need some degree of positive reinforcement. We also need to be smacked upside the head when we're totally off in the weeds. It's all about balance. The forums of ancient Greece weren't filled with people fervently agreeing with one another and shouting down new ideas en masse. We need discourse, not demagoguery.
Dev.to, medium, etc are all the fast fashion of the tech industry. Personally, I'd prefer something designed to last a little longer.30 -
I really appreciate all the discourse around imposter syndrome even though I feel like I’m ACTUALLY an imposter you’re all... imposter imposters! I’m the only one who REALLY isn’t capable of doing this work.
I love programming so much but I cannot force myself to believe in myself????? I cannot imagine being able to do this as a career. I’m afraid I’m gonna have to drop out of school or even if I don’t drop out I won’t be able to find a job cause I just suck at this. Ugh8 -
This is a proposal for an entirely free and open source rant like site/app.
devrant today has a couple of problems that I hate:
* Posts in the wrong categories (usually by new users)
* Low effort posts in the "recent" feed
* Good posts in the "algo" feed that are too old
* Longtime bugs
* No official code format in comments, ffs.
* Unimplemented features (like inability to search posts in android, or inability to mute posts in web desktop)
* Lack of admin involvement with the community
but it also has some aspects that I like a lot:
* Admins aren't trigger happy to suspend/ban you
* The avatars are awesome and help to associate users to faces
* The ++ system is good enough
* The community isn't too big so you know pretty much everyone
* There's a lot of variety in the roles and techonologies used by users
* Experienced ranters are usually smart
* Super simple UI
* The comments have only one level (as opposed to reddit comment trees)
This project should try to reimplement the good things while fixing the bad things.
I wrote two posts about a possible manifesto, and an implementation proposal and plan.
https://rantcourse.ddns.net/t/...
https://rantcourse.ddns.net/t/...
I think the ideas outlined there are very aligned to concerns of privacy and freedom users here vouch for.
This project is not meant to **purposefully** replace/kill/make users abandon devrant. People can continue using devrant as much as they want.
I'm hosting a discourse site on a 5$ linode machine to discuss these things. I don't know if it's better than just github.
If you feel that you would like to just use github issues, let me know. I'll create a github org tomorrow, and probably setup gitter for more dynamic discussion.21 -
!dev
I have a couple of thoughts about social justice controversies from these last years.
I think it's hard to have a good opinion about these events for several reasons.
One reason is that finding good information in 2019 is very hard.
Revenue based sites (thus unneutral) dominate the search results. You search about something and you find thousands of sites basically saying the same thing (because they copy each other).
That's why the existence of a free and open search engine is so important, so it's easier to find neutral hence good information on which to base your opinions, but they are prohibitively big for small groups to build.
Another reason is that controversies generate shock and shock curtails rational thinking. Maybe that's how the primitive brain works?
I'm not much of a scholar to feel confident to say that, but it's so recurrent that it's not too much of a wild guess.
When a controversy happens, a natural reaction is to pick a side. This means that:
a) we assume that there are only 2 sides, and
b) we must pick one of them
So, maybe the human is a bad politician by nature?
Also, because of the shock controversies generate, peaceful dialogue is very rare.
I have yet to see peaceful dialogue online about what patriarchy means to feminists and a lot of other terms they use.
I don't care much about feminists that vandalize or interrupt talks (yelling over someone else is abuse in my opinion).
But for the rest of them, I think discussing their ideas would be good.
I say this because most feminist discourse I see online is not open. Or maybe there are such instances but the web is so big that it's hard to find such instances.
I think some part of the modern feminist doctrine is bullshit, and some part is true.
I for one hate when some men I know in life expect their wives to be their cooks+cleaners (unless they want to do that, willingly). Personally, I'd encourage my wife to get a job (rightfully so, not just to meet some minority quota in some company).
I don't mind either calling a trans person the pronoun she wants.
But other ideas are awful, like the idea that meritocracy is patriarchy, so you need to force minorities to meet a proportionate quota. That's terrible reasoning.
Or the excessive self appreciation culture, like saying to yourself "you are pretty, you are beautiful, you are perfect". I think that grows arrogance and black-or-white thinking.
And some other ideas as well.
I guess the same you can say about any doctrine with different degrees. Some part is bullshit, some part isn't.
Some right wing people hate everyone who isn't white by default, but some want to have more immigration control.
I sure don't like the experiment of separating children from families like the current us govt did, but I wouldn't be happy either to know that by '99 50% of gangs members in the us were hispanic.
With this, I'm not going to say "embrace everyone's ideas" like an idiot. I hate when people do that. It's a stupid and weak reaction to radicalism.
In fact I think the way you fight radicalism and bad doctrines is that you listen to them and maintain good dialogue and counterargue in a respectful but insightful manner.
Making snide remarks, insulting or trolling won't change anyone's mind. That is just throwing fire to the fire.
In fact, when someone gets harassed because of something they believe in, usually it results in even more adherence to their beliefs, because of the usual assumption that success or goodness is full of strife.
So by telling a "sjw" or kkk member that they are idiots over twitter, you are in fact making them stronger believers in their doctrine.
Think of Daryl Davis, a black guy that made 200 members leave the kkk. How? He didn't tell them they were assholes, he somehow made friends with them.
I feel bad now because I've been trolling new devrant users a lot because of how they worsen the quality of the site, but maybe I should tell them that they are ruining the site somehow in a nice way and maybe they'll listen? I dunno...23 -
daily reminder (most of you don't need it i know) that reddit is full of the most ignorant and dumb people on the planet
thought i could hop into comments on a /r/worldnews post for interesting discussion and discourse, no, its just idiotic neckbeards trying to one up eachother on painfully cringe doomer phrases and / or who can get the most upvotes from their godawful dumbass pun
what a fuckin cesspool
and they wonder why the world is going to shit7 -
holy fuck, UFOs are now moving to the "mainstream discourse"?????
yes, just like AI, world's ending, all the jobs are gone!!!
just like covid (remember that one?) world's over, we all died!
let me repeat it for you:
shut the fuck up
shut the fuck up
shut the fuck up
what the fuck went wrong with the vast majority of people along the way????
i'm going to the mountains, i'll be back...
never
inb4 "have some creativity fullstackclown!" "isn't it cool to think about?!"
shut up, using your fucking head that is a result of millions of years of evolution seems much more exciting than taking 4 grainy ass videos as truth and getting hyped up about it
show me a shred of valid evidence and i'll believe. however, evidence does NOT include:
- some big wig CLAIMING or SAYING they exist, regardless of their credentials - i don't care if fucking honest abe lincoln himself rises from the grave and says UFOs are real
- a photo or video that looks like it was taken in the 1920s8 -
Long story short:
Just had several problems with using some drone ci plugins (hugo and sftp). Found issues regarding the problems on GitHub. Issues have been open for several years. Still open. Tried to participate or ask for the state. Got a "no one else got a problem with this". Recoded both plugins. Tested them. Using them now. Source is on GitHub. Posted them as alternatives on drone's discourse. Got flagged as spam.
Nice. Not using Drone again. Searching for an alternative now.
Little extra: I think they banned me from posting GitHub links on their discourse.4 -
So, the internet is over. Just in case you didn’t notice. If you post a link to anything that involves you: an article, a podcast, a thing you built, a video you made - then mods and admins and trolls get their pitchforks and ban you or roast you or delete you.
This is not the way.
Not only are the walled gardens of apple, Twitter, Facebook/Instagram, breaking the web into little areas - and marketing is buying your time - but we’re doing it to ourselves too.
I can’t post a video about some of my favorite programming books in
/learnprogramming or I’m immediately banned!? Every link that takes people away from your ad dollars is ‘spam?’ Without any useful discourse and content - then why would anyone be there in the first place.
One time I posted a link HERE about how people could get CSS help in the CSS discord and I got fire-stormed for self-promotion. Really? Hundreds of hours helping people learn programming - for free... is my self promotion? Is everyone so insecure that they can’t allow anyone else to talk about their work? It’s super scary.
This is how you control people. This is Nazi shit. It’s a slippery Slope. Watch out.
And whatever you do... don’t share links to your things. That is NOT what the internet was made for.4 -
It's so refreshing to find a place with so much discourse that hasn't been overrun with memes...#$%&!1
-
Programming is life ❤️
Just as life, it has it's ups and downs, but it's truly satisfying to create complex systems and get them to actually work and be useful to others.
We have only just started with the digitalisation of previously manual, tedious tasks. Imagine what all this saved time and labour could bring us to achieve in areas we haven't yet had the time to explore.
I hope mankind is ready for the ongoing and upcoming challenges regarding data privacy and security.
Nah, in reality, we will be stuck with Fakebook and Tweeter selling all our dickpics to *in Trump voice* "Chiner" and censoring unpopular opinion and discourse.
These "digital parasites" can all go sit on a rusty spike. -
Discourse is a overly complicated software, could have been so much simpler without losing any of its feature. Installation sucks, development sucks and ofcourse their choice of using Rails sucks big time. Hoping Flarum will fix the issue of pathetic forum softwares.
-
Here's a brain teaser for you.
Does talking about the Master/Slave debacle technically classify as political discourse?5 -
Best website hosting for an dev profolio and subdomains like go daddy, but can support web apps like discourse or ruby?10
-
I can't post a collab from the web client and I don't have a decent phone atm, anyways, this is an idea, tell me if you have any improvements or if you know of an implementation or would be interested in creating one.
A social network comment system that connects people across fields of interest and aids keeping relevant posts alive for a long time.
The basic principle is this: Every post may identify itself as a child to any number of other posts, or sections in other posts, which then act much like a bidirectional hyperlink between parent and child.
This leads to two unusual results:
1. that comments aren’t only added to posts, but specific paragraphs, sentences or even words.
2. that any comment may receive comments in much the same way the original post did, making comments identical to posts. (they could have their own pages and all).
This is in many ways like Reddit's infinite comment chains. The main difference is that here comments aren’t organized in trees but graphs, which makes it possible to connect related conversations from entirely different groups and times, resulting in a much more open yet concise discourse style with an increased persistence of topics. -
The Turing Test, a concept introduced by Alan Turing in 1950, has been a foundation concept for evaluating a machine's ability to exhibit human-like intelligence. But as we edge closer to the singularity—the point where artificial intelligence surpasses human intelligence—a new, perhaps unsettling question comes to the fore: Are we humans ready for the Turing Test's inverse? Unlike Turing's original proposition where machines strive to become indistinguishable from humans, the Inverse Turing Test ponders whether the complex, multi-dimensional realities generated by AI can be rendered palatable or even comprehensible to human cognition. This discourse goes beyond mere philosophical debate; it directly impacts the future trajectory of human-machine symbiosis.
Artificial intelligence has been advancing at an exponential pace, far outstripping Moore's Law. From Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) that create life-like images to quantum computing that solve problems unfathomable to classical computers, the AI universe is a sprawling expanse of complexity. What's more compelling is that these machine-constructed worlds aren't confined to academic circles. They permeate every facet of our lives—be it medicine, finance, or even social dynamics. And so, an existential conundrum arises: Will there come a point where these AI-created outputs become so labyrinthine that they are beyond the cognitive reach of the average human?
The Human-AI Cognitive Disconnection
As we look closer into the interplay between humans and AI-created realities, the phenomenon of cognitive disconnection becomes increasingly salient, perhaps even a bit uncomfortable. This disconnection is not confined to esoteric, high-level computational processes; it's pervasive in our everyday life. Take, for instance, the experience of driving a car. Most people can operate a vehicle without understanding the intricacies of its internal combustion engine, transmission mechanics, or even its embedded software. Similarly, when boarding an airplane, passengers trust that they'll arrive at their destination safely, yet most have little to no understanding of aerodynamics, jet propulsion, or air traffic control systems. In both scenarios, individuals navigate a reality facilitated by complex systems they don't fully understand. Simply put, we just enjoy the ride.
However, this is emblematic of a larger issue—the uncritical trust we place in machines and algorithms, often without understanding the implications or mechanics. Imagine if, in the future, these systems become exponentially more complex, driven by AI algorithms that even experts struggle to comprehend. Where does that leave the average individual? In such a future, not only are we passengers in cars or planes, but we also become passengers in a reality steered by artificial intelligence—a reality we may neither fully grasp nor control. This raises serious questions about agency, autonomy, and oversight, especially as AI technologies continue to weave themselves into the fabric of our existence.
The Illusion of Reality
To adequately explore the intricate issue of human-AI cognitive disconnection, let's journey through the corridors of metaphysics and epistemology, where the concept of reality itself is under scrutiny. Humans have always been limited by their biological faculties—our senses can only perceive a sliver of the electromagnetic spectrum, our ears can hear only a fraction of the vibrations in the air, and our cognitive powers are constrained by the limitations of our neural architecture. In this context, what we term "reality" is in essence a constructed narrative, meticulously assembled by our senses and brain as a way to make sense of the world around us. Philosophers have argued that our perception of reality is akin to a "user interface," evolved to guide us through the complexities of the world, rather than to reveal its ultimate nature. But now, we find ourselves in a new (contrived) techno-reality.
Artificial intelligence brings forth the potential for a new layer of reality, one that is stitched together not by biological neurons but by algorithms and silicon chips. As AI starts to create complex simulations, predictive models, or even whole virtual worlds, one has to ask: Are these AI-constructed realities an extension of the "grand illusion" that we're already living in? Or do they represent a departure, an entirely new plane of existence that demands its own set of sensory and cognitive tools for comprehension? The metaphorical veil between humans and the universe has historically been made of biological fabric, so to speak.7