Ephera

I hear, it helps with saving up for treatment by not paying for nudes. 🥴

I always struggle with that for equalizers. I think, I understand the concept, but no matter how much I fuck up the sliders on the equalizer, I always find it interesting more than anything else. It sounds different, sure enough, but is it better or worse? No idea.

From my limited understanding (and what I just read up right now), if you send audio through non-flat-response speakers multiple times (so stick a mic in front of the speaker to re-record it, and play it back through the speakers again) then each time your highs and lows would become more silent and the mids would become louder.
They're designed as the last piece in the chain, to then give some artistic coloring to the music.

Flat response is designed to not do that, so that what comes out sounds as much as possible like what you've put in.

In my personal experience as a very hobbyist musician, yes, of course I will also try to listen to my shit on phone speakers and try to make it not sound entirely terrible there. But you go from one consumer-grade speaker to the next and entirely different frequency ranges are fucked up.

Having some headphones that don't fuck with the sound (whether intentional or just crappy) is really helpful, because they give me a middleground that's likely to sound reasonable on multiple systems.
Much better than composing on a system that fucks it up in a specific way and then playing back on another system that fucks it up in a different way. That's pretty much guaranteed to sound terrible.

Gonna be interesting, if they spontaneously decide they wanted to open-source all along, like how LLAMA did back then...

The shape kind of reminds me of those hearse cars:

I don't remember the details, but the Meltdown and Spectre vulnerabilities from a few years ago also felt like they were cutting corners. Those were enabled by some fundamental architectural decisions, which really just didn't sound like a good idea to me, when I read up on them.

Definitely possible. I remember being genuinely appalled when our teacher casually told us that most stories can be divided into three acts (Setup, Confrontation, Resolution).

Rationally, I've understood that it's almost like a law of nature. You kind of have to tell stories this way.
But on an irrational level, I'm thinking, great, they've spoiled the end of most stories. If they all end with a resolution, why even bother listening to them?

...that is somewhat of a hyperbole, but there are further subdivisions that make this even more obvious. Like hero's journey that you named, where you can tell that they're going to survive at least until the final conflict, and even then there's a pretty good chance for a happy end, because people like those. If my brain latches onto one person being the hero, it feels like I know the remaining story arc already.

And I have to admit that I don't read much, so this is the first time I'm hearing of Le Guin.
But it's not just the writing either way. I do also always feel like I might as well read about the real world before I read about fictional worlds. I don't need to know about aliens and dragons, when ants exist and are so much cooler.

Yeah, I might block a contributor on sight, if they post something like that.

In case, you're not aware, you can also email the dev. You can code up your commits as normal and then use e.g. git format-patch -3 to put the last 3 commits patch files. You can then attach those files to an e-mail and the dev can apply those patches with git am.

It takes a bit of playing around, but it's actually really easy.
The Linux kernel, one of the most complex projects on the planet, develops like this.

I think, you could open the same file multiple times and then just skip ahead by some number of bytes before you start reading.

But yeah, no idea if this would actually be efficient. The bottleneck is likely still the hard drive and trying to fit multiple sections of the file into RAM might end up being worse than reading linearly...

Yeah, and the worst part is that submitting the PR is trivial. You just offload the reviewing work onto the maintainer and then feed the review comments back into the AI. Effectively, you're making the maintainer talk to the AI, by going through you as a middleman, a.k.a. completely wasting their time.

Eh, I was kind of punting towards all of fiction there. With something like Scrubs (if we count that towards fiction), it doesn't bother me, because the situations are realistic and then as many others said, it's about the stories that unfold in that scenario.

But even copaganda or trash TV will play up each new case, e.g.: "Jeremias has not touched grass in 17 years. Will our team succeed in changing that?" and "The police has been on the hunt for this serial killer for 5 years. After 378 victims, will Shirley Holmes finally catch him?".

I guess, yeah, it is also a matter of bad writers, though. It is far too easy to come to a point where you need drama and to then just make up big numbers with no credibility.