I don't really think you will have enough people see your code, just because you put it on the internet.
I have uploaded quite a few things (some of them are even useful) and nobody really cares. Though they most probably just get bored and move onto other people's profiIes, after starting with the useless ones.
ulterno
joined 1 year ago
Guess I'll go reupload the code for my B.Tech project, which was too spaghetti, even by my standards.
I happily push even the low quality stuff I make.
Some of the repos aren't even meant to be used as is, but is just full of other spaghetti with some parts properly done, which I then tell the intended recipient to pick out of. But still, the whole thing is available for the world to see.
Even the good ones have a pretty casual git log.
I only really try to make stuff pretty, when giving code to other's projects and even then, I will be pretty casual in the commit messages for the MR, which I then intend on squashing later.
I don't get how an MDA would translate to "no programmers needed". Maybe they meant "coders"?
But really, I feel like the people who use this phrase to pitch their product either don't know how many people actually find it difficult to break down tasks into logical components, such that a computer would be able to use,, or they're lying.
KYE
KYS
And Victory will be Ours!
Modern fonts have extra stuff to make rendering better.
Like hinting, which changes subpixel representations.
Without those, you wouldn't like the look of something like a character with a height of 10px on a 1080p display and would have to use way higher DPI stuff, with characters taking more pixels.
Won't be unusable though. Automatically done anti-aliasing tends to be good enough too.
I initially started de-upvoting just because it felt weird to have a blue marker on my own comment, which was supposed to be for other's comments that I upvoted. It then evolved into having a "reason" behind it. But yeah, it just seems weird to upvote one's own comment.
Well, first you need to define a "person".
Then you need to define the starting point and what all environmental features you are considering as zero cost.
Otherwise, to calculate energy to kill a person, you need to start by creating the universe.
On the other hand, for a human person, you can either just get a really big syringe and siphon out blood from the heart, or pierce a thin little metal pipe with tactically placed holes, which will let gravity and internal blood pressure do the job. But these require access to a syringe/metal pipe making setup, which has its own energy costs.
And here I was considering petitioning for an open source UPI app.
Turns out, the Government is just another company now.
I feel like they'd be happy installing yet another spying app, if that means getting to keep millions of data providers.
Are my eyes too good, or your "Spoiler" isn't spoily?
With current levels of technology, they would require humans for maintenance.
Not because they don't have self-replication, because they can just make that if they have a proper intelligence, but because their energy costs are too high and can't fill AI all the way.
OK, so I didn't think enough. They might just end up making robots with expert systems, to do the maintenance work which would require not wasting resources on "intelligence".