Last I checked living conditions actually improved in socialist states that USSR supported, while it was the US that ran around overthrowing democratic governments and creating mass poverty. Should learn some history.

🤡

The only one doing a gish gallop here is you. I had a very clear and simple point all along, which is that it’s not productive to perseverate over symptoms of the system. Evidently, you’re incapable of addressing this point and instead proceed to keep making straw man arguments that have nothing to do with anything I said. Apparently you think that if you keep writing walls of text that will somehow distract from the fact that you don’t have any actual counterpoint to the simple statement I made.

Seeing how you clearly need to have the last word here, I’m going to stop here so you can get it out of your system and move on with your life. Bye.

The only one struggling with “non sequitur” and “strawman” and “basic connections to underlying language” is you. Since you keep using these terms without evidently understanding them or even understanding the content of what’s being said to you. The irony here of you exhibiting generative model behavior while raging against them is quite hilarious.

None of the points you’ve listed actually address my argument, and it’s pretty clear that you’re either incapable of understanding it or intentionally avoid engaging with it. My blog in no way contradicts my online persona, but I guess that’s something you felt important to throw in as a way of ad hominem in lieu of having any actual point to make.

Cheers.

Thanks for clarifying that you utterly failed to understand what was being said to you. My point was that the actual problem is with the capitalist system itself. Stuff like Crypto, NFTs, and generative AI is not the root cause of the problems, it’s simply a symptom of an underlying problem. Getting upset over these things is a complete and utter waste of energy, and it’s utterly misguided. Let me know if you’re still having trouble understanding my point and need me to use smaller words to get it across.

Maybe the real issue is that you’re desperately trying to show how clever and cultured you are while just outing yourself as a boring pedant?

The joke is very obviously that modern software development is hellish. The fact that you couldn’t figure out a simple joke, but fancy yourself as some sort of an intellectual and an art critic is really chef’s kiss.

Hence why it’s pointless trying to have an actual discussion with people like you.

I applaud you for being able to produce content indistinguishable from a chat bot. A really clever way to illustrate why we don’t actually need LLMs.

I love it when trolls get angry and start using Latin terms to make themselves sound clever.

It’s adorable that you think you’re making the world a better place by leaving vapid angry comments on public forums.

Enjoy tilting at windmills I guess.

My point was that wasting energy raging about this stuff isn’t going to make it go away.

Good thing we never found ways to waste energy on shit like NFTs before generative models showed up.

If even a fraction of the rage AI generated content produces could be harnessed as useful energy, it could power all of humanity’s needs till the end of time.

I find a good approach to getting better at programming is to reflect on the projects you’ve done and try to identify patterns that got you into trouble. Then you can try doing things differently next time, and eventually you end up settling on a style that works for you. At the end of the day it’s really just practice. The one key thing I’ve learned to focus on is reducing the operating context I need to have when reading the code. Once the context becomes too big to keep in your head, then trouble starts. So breaking things up aggressively into small components you can reason about in isolation tends to be the best way to write reliable code you can maintain over time.

I’ve noticed that debugging tends to be more important in imperative languages than functional ones. With imperative style, you have a lot of implicit state that you need to know to figure out what actually happened. So, you end up having to go through the steps of building that state up before you can start figuring out what went wrong. On the other hand, the state is passed around explicitly with the functional paradigm, and you can typically figure out the problem by looking at the exact spot where the error occurred.

My typical debugging workflow with Clojure is to just read the stack trace, go to the last function in it, and then see what it’s doing wrong. Very rarely do I find the need to start digging deeper. I think another aspect of it is having an interactive development workflow. When you’re running code as you’re developing it, you see problems pop up as you go and you can fix them before you move to the next step. This way you don’t end up in situations where you wrote a whole bunch of code that you haven’t run, and now you’re not sure if it all works the way you expected.

Sure, anarcho-syndicalism seems very compatible with Marxism for example. The main disagreement tends to be around what is actually to be done about the dictatorship of capital that we all live under in the west.

The whole context for this thread is you claiming that an actually existing socialist state is not really socialist because it doesn’t pass your purity test.

Nobody is talking about any dark rooms, just go look at what PSL is doing very much in the open. If you look at any successful revolution it has always started by building support networks and organizing communities. It’s kind of wild that you are not aware of this. The difference with communists is that we understand that an organized dictatorship of capital requires organization and education to fight against. So, along with building out support networks we also focus on political education, organization, and long term goals.