For software to run on a computer, it needs to tell the computer what to do, “display this picture of a flower”, “move my character to the left”, “save this poem to a file”.

And for a bunch of different software to all run on the same machine, they all need to use the same basic set of instructions, this is called the machine’s Instruction Set.

Because the instruction set has to work for any software, these instructions don’t look that readable to us, instead of “show this flower” they might be “move this bit of memory into the processor”, but software builds up millions of those instructions to eventually display a flower.

Intel processors used a set of instructions that were called x86, and then when AMD made a rival processor, they made theirs use the same instruction set so that their processors would be compatible with all the software written for Intel processors (and when they needed to move from 32bit instructions to 64bit instructions, they made a new set called x64).

Meanwhile Apple computers for a long time used processors built by IBM that used IBMs PowerPC instruction set.

Now many companies are using the ARM instruction set, but ARM is still a private company you have to pay licensing fees to, so RISC-V is rising as a new, truly open source and free to use instruction set.

It’s not tho.

Or is this a battle I can pick to shield my self from ms

Read the post before coming to the comments to reply.

OP is asking on here about whether or not to pick this battle and fight his company over it. Yes, you are probably technically correct that a company can’t force you to install an authenticator app on your phone. However, that is a battle that you will have to fight with them that will accomplish essentially nothing if you win.

In Canada right now there is a major auto manufacturer that is being sued by the union over this very issue. It is a years long legal case that had to be escalated through the union, it’s lawyers ,and now arbitration. Does that not sound like a battle to you?

Because an object is good at representing a noun, not a verb, and when expressing logical flows and concepts, despite what Java will tell you, not everything is in fact, a noun.

I.e. in OOP languages that do not support functional programming as first class (like Java), you end up with a ton of overhead and unnecessary complications and objects named like generatorFactoryServiceCreatorFactory because the language forces you to creat a noun (object) to take an action rather than just create a verb (function) and pass that around.

You’re wasting your life trying to fight battles you don’t even understand.

Go home OP, you’re drunk.

And give us your keys, you’ve had too much minimalism to drive.

Answer: there’d be far less software in the world, it would all be more archaic and less useful, and our phones and laptops would just sit at 2% utilization most of the time.

There’s an opportunity cost to everything, including fussing over whether that value can be stored as an int instead of a double to save 8 bits of space. High level languages let developers express their feature and business logic faster, with fewer bugs, and much lower ongoing maintenance costs.

Philosophers literally invented formal logic to help them answer questions. Yes they are trying to answer questions and constrain the possible answer space where they can’t.

The problem with philosophy in terms of understanding the bigger questions in life is that advanced physics has answered many questions that were previously in the realm of philosophy, and you can’t really understand what’s possible in reality / what constraints there are on abstract philosophy without understanding advanced physics.

Of course the problem with advanced physics is that it takes so much time and effort to learn and understand thoroughly that you often end up as a not great communicator to the average person.

Or, to be cheeky: physics aims to take the largest and most complicated concepts in the universe and explain them in the simplest possible language, and philosophy is the opposite.

Cool beans bro, learn how to read a full comment and you’d see the part where it doesn’t matter since theyre basically the same and have the same drawbacks.

It provides its method isn’t good enough to provide value then and it’s just a waste of compute time.

I’m conflating a tool library and a maker space but the same issues apply to both. Either way, for home projects you end up with a whole lot of extra transportation.

Libraries are non profits, everyone who works there just gets paid a wage, no one makes more money if libraries make more money.

Or from a systemic standpoint, the library system is effectively separate from the capitalist system we use for distributing everything else. In capitalism if you have no competition you raise prices so you get richer, so functioning capitalism requires multiple copies of everything and a lot of redundancy all actively competing. The library being non-profit sidesteps that effect.

Renting stuff makes sense, but there are still lots of inherent problems with tool libraries and the like.

They’re great for a carpet shampooer or chainsaw you need once a year, but if you actually want to fix and build stuff around the home then booking a tool, taking perfect measurements, hauling your stuff over to a tool library, building it, hauling everything back home to check it, is simply an infeasibly onerous process. The instant you make a mistake and need a different tool, or check a measurement, etc, you’re wasting hours of time, which is most often the biggest limiter for home projects anyways.

You also don’t get to learn on the same tool and build up instincts and understanding of how it behaves.

This is a terrible summary, it feels like you just summarized the first 3 paragraphs.

In North America you don’t see many home improvement stores downtown where people are most likely to rent.

Most Lowe’s, Home Depots, etc do have tool rental options, but they’re located out in the burbs where land is cheap and everyone has space to store tools.

Yes there are pros and cons to both, but that does not mean they are the same or equal.

Renting inherently adds an extra middleman to the process, (someone still has to buy it), who is incentivized to rent-seek and drain everyone from as much of their money as possible.

Renting really only works in scenarios where you have a bunch of different rental companies to drive down costs, but now you’re starting to get back to the original problem of duplicating everything.

I feel like Sony did a Sony here.

I’m old enough to remember when Sony shipped 22 million malware infested CDs because they were worried about Napster.

Shit video OP

Given that the whole context of this thread is why theists are scared of dying, you kind of did insinuate that with your story.