I sleep with a blanket even when it's too hot. 90% of the year the temperature is low enough that I need it, and sleeping without it the other 10% of the year just feels wrong, and I feel exposed.
No, but no-one said that. It's far more likely that this "group" of people doesn't even exist, and it's yet another case of treating "strangers on the internet" or "other people" as one person and being upset when that "person" is being inconsistent.
"I doubt the GP has gone back through their career and checked on each person who thought there were too many meetings have now all made the switched they're being accused of, though."
Anyway, I'm stopping this now as it's not a constructive conversation anymore. Let's agree to disagree.
It's not the effort or the lack thereof here that's the issue, but rather the message you're sending by using slop tools to create the design of the advertisement of your research. It looks cheap.
I'm sure that, at first glance, many more people would take this much more seriously had the authors gone with a style-less HTML page or something, and that'd require _less_ effort, not more.
I have heard this logic before, defending over-engineering the looks to hide a brittle backed. Both sides look very entrenched on their position, I lean more towards having a solid backend and see the polished frontend as a waste of effort, but I understand your logic of seeing it as professionalism. My point is that you are not sending only one message by using a cheap slop static html: some will see lazy and cheap people, some will see people focusing on the real thing with no time or willingness to make shiny sites.
Depends on where (maybe mostly what country) you work. I get 35 vacation days per year, which if we include the weekends adds up to 51 days. Not that I would ever want to spend those days on a bus. And then I'd have to get back as well.
But if cyan for me is blue, and for you it's green, or neither (though that option is not available in this test), then that DOES tell us if our definitions of the word "blue" match. For me, the concept "blue" covers the cyan part of the spectrum, while for others it clearly doesn't.
What's good or bad is subjective. I've seen plenty of (in my opinion) good AI-generated content. But making such a sweeping statement suggests to me that your mind is made up on the topic.
I strongly prefer local software, but as someone coming from Photoshop who now only does the occasional edit (and therefore can't justify the price), I find Photopea to be a good alternative, especially since it closely mimics Photoshop's interface so I don't have to learn a new UI. Also, your images stay local on your computer and aren't uploaded to their servers.
It's developed by a single guy, which I think is very impressive given how much of Photoshop's functionality it has. I just really wish it were open source (and not a web app).
It's the same in every discussion about OS vs OS. People who like one OS will claim that the other OS is full of problems, and vice versa. In some cases I guess people are just lucky/unlucky. Personally, I've been using both in parallel for about 15 years, and while I've never had any issues with Windows (no BSODs), Linux constantly gives me problems. But I'm a developer and much prefer to develop on Linux, so I stick with it.
Though I think that is not warranted with respect to my original comment. I have used Linux in some form or shape for 31 years now (jikes), I would love Linux to win, and I have used Linux on a wide variety of hardware (last few laptops have been ThinkPads).
I think desktop Linux will not improve until people start acknowledging the issues and work on it. It's the same as the claim that Linux is very secure (which Linux fans will often repeat), while it has virtually no layered security, and a fairly large part of the community is actively hostile towards such improvements (e.g. fully verified boot).
reply