Rule of thumb:

• are you making fun or otherwise mocking someone?
• are you doing it for any “bad reason” whatsoever?
• are you doing something that is/was primarily done by others for “bad reasons”, historically?
• are you doing something that other groups started doing as a replacement for something else that they were not allowed to (that you are)?

I’m half asleep so I may have forgotten something but if I didn’t, then answering No to all of those should be the minimum thing you do.

Unlikely to ever happen, but Xenogears.

Did not expect to see a Croc game ever again. Now all we’re missing is Gex.

Ok that may take a few years.

With Climate Change we’ll eventually run out of names. Unless Hurricane Karen manages to be the one that kills everyone before that happens.

Not necessarily. They might just be able to choose the strength at will and decided not to start out with the max output back with Katrina.

Superman knows where there’s people and where there isn’t. Authors can argue there wasn’t anyone there.

I remember a time back when I still used twitter, thinking: “oh guess I’ll follow that dude who created Javascript” then shortly after wondering: “why is there so much stupid shit showing up on my timeline lately?”.

You can but only if you’re wearing the Zora armor.

“oldies” these days are Avril Lavigne, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Gorillaz. Or as I like to call them: music from the early century.

Oh I trust my code, but I don’t trust my coworkers not to break something on the very next commit.

ClickUp is A LOT worse than Jira.

I meant that the person on that image could be describing themselves as having a micro penis because of those things instead of actually having a micro penis. That’s why I placed the word “turn” in quotes.

It might just have “turned” micro afterwards, with a combination of a bunch of stuff, like them being a grower, the person putting on weight and also losing libido.

Just never saw the need for it.

You can create files with the same name differing only by case through WSL. I’ve had issues with it before.

If a tool were created that properly converted an UML diagram into a project without any need for code, all the programmers that lost their job to this tool would then be hired by the company that offered it, in order to give maintenance and support to everything the customers want in their programs.

It would be removing programmers from they payroll of some companies but they would still be working for them, just further down in the chain.

The same is true for AI. If AI could completely replace programmers in some area, it would need a lot of programmers itself to keep dealing with all the edge cases that would show up from being used everywhere that a programmer was needed before.

I believed they maybe weren’t listening because those cases that people claim as “proof” of listening can usually be explained in other ways as well. People tend to assume they were listening because its the easier explanation but with the amount of data that Meta has, they can easily lead people into thinking about things by showing specific posts on the Facebook timeline and also predict to some extent what people may end up talking about based on things like how many times you replay a certain video and how long did you keep certain posts in focus on the screen and that sort of stuff that people often don’t realize is also data for them.

Still, I would never put my hand on fire for them and never completely discarded the possibility of them listening.

Well we always accused Meta of listening. If it was their partners, they technically weren’t lying when they said they weren’t. “we don’t need to listen to you” was technically correct too, it just missed one word: “we don’t need to listen to you ourselves”

I couldn’t find any study on this.