nekomusumeninaritai

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

You've gotta repost that as a gif (it didn't show up in browser for me but managed to watch it on the link). It was an awesome scene. I wish that was what stack overflow looked like. edit:ip→up

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I suspect if you are trying to build an inclusive community but don't have a lot of diversity already, the only thing you can really do to change the culture is to remind people to be considerate in the way they speak. And if most people who would be offended aren't actually part of the community (but you would like them to feel welcome to join), then you might want some bot rather than a person to be the “narc” and remind people to be on their best behavior. So I guess if the mods are the only ones who want to be nice, then yes, it is a bit ridiculous because it will never work. Even if people change their language, they won't be nice. But if most people want things to change, it could be a helpful way to both remind you to be inclusive and get the few people who would rather talk about how having to say bartender is censorship (without actually defending why they want to make a point of saying “barmen”) to realize that they either have to change the way they talk in that particular community or find a better fit.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

This is exactly why I feel nervous asking questions online. I feel like a lot of the time the answer is so obvious that a bot could answer it with very little context and then I'll look silly.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Ooh, cool.

{X|X∉X}∈{X|X∉X}⇐⇒{X|X∉X}∉{X|X∉X} (1)

{X|X∉X}∈{X|X∉X}∧¬{X|X∉X}∈{X|X∉X} (2)

Thence G(me) (2,explosion)

where G(x): x has 1,000,000 bars of gold

Thanks for the gold

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It's how ~~isoforms~~ functions with different signatures evolve. As long as it isn't harmful it tends to stick around. Then the different code may develop adaptations which fit it into a niche if it is a selective advantage for the ~~organism~~ code base.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Couldn't a Chromium clone relicensed under some copyleft license also be a viable option against Chromiums? Chromium is licensed under BSD-3 which Wikipedia claims is compatible with the GPL, so there wouldn't be any legal reason this couldn't be done, right? Other than not really wanting to split a project with excessive forks (which is only bad if you think that the Chromium project itself is a net good), is there some technical or other reason why this would be a bad idea?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Uninformed copyright law speculationIANAL, but a hash of music is not the music itself, something that can be converted to music, or in any way protected by copyright AFAIK. That being said, I think the rest of your comment is correct.
Edit: fixed bad spoiler/cw syntax

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ah, but where do you find the training set of all of the human-written good commit messages? 😃

view more: ‹ prev next ›