No worries about the WoT, I’ve often been there myself.
Thank you for the clarification. As I said, I didn’t see and don’t plan to watch the video, so I didn’t know the details. I don’t know what it would take for Linux to be widely adopted or whether it could be considered “ready” but I wish it would.
That’s why I left Reddit and why I’m still on Lemmy!
Funny, a variation of this song came on my Pandora station immediately after I read this comment.
To strengthen the calves, presumably?
Yeah, I didn’t see that video, but I recall reading about it. Apparently the package manager warned him that something would be potentially destructive and he ignored the warning, then blamed Linux for it when it was destructive.
I have nothing clever to say here, so normally I’d let my upvote express my feelings, but that feels inadequate in this case. I just wanted to use my words to let you know that this comment amused me a great deal and to thank you.
I’m not exactly sure what you’re saying here, so I apologize if I’m misinterpreting, but - while I have many potential complaints about Linus - I don’t blame him for his name resembling the word “Linux.”
Because of his name, I thought he was a pro-Linux channel. I was swiftly disappointed.
Would have been more fun, if less accurate, to call them pinecones.
I like the commercial that shows the glasses helping someone cheat at billiards. Or the one that demonstrates how you could use them to covertly record people at a party without their consent or knowledge. Really makes me glad these products exist so that one can easily act unethically with fewer social consequences.
You sure are loud for - oh, you’re angry and a seal. Carry on.
He does, and the commenters had many varied opinions about it: https://youtu.be/crjxpZHv7Hk
Veritasium also has a video on standards: https://youtu.be/esQyYGezS7c
Tom Scott also has a video about it, but a quick search returns several possible results and (despite his probably being the best) I don’t remember enough about it to determine which is the correct one nor enough time to watch and determine.
This is similar to the thought process cracked.com recommended regarding gamma ray bursts, IIRC.
I’m currently doing some studies and only briefly logged in here to check things, but once my boring studies are done, I’ll try to remember to check your link for interesting studies.
I’m familiar (very vaguely) with the unstable universe. It reminds me of an author, Douglas Adams I believe, who wrote "There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.
There is another theory which states that this has already happened."
I saw your comment much earlier but was in the middle of my workday and I didn’t have time to review it until now, so I apologize for the delay.
Your answer is interesting, insightful and educational, for all of which I am grateful. I hadn’t considered that perspective and it is all of the adjectives I listed previously.
However, I don’t think it answers at least what I meant by the original question, even if it does answer the literal question I asked. That’s on me for not using sufficiently specific language. What I meant wasn’t “why do things obey the laws of physics as we understand them” or “why do things obey the laws of physics as we’ve defined them” but more “whatever the laws of physics truly are as defined by the universe, what makes the content of the universe obey them?” I was quite young when I asked my dad the question, so at the time I pictured little Marvin the Martian style physics policemen following atoms around enforcing the law, but I suspect that’s not correct.
My question is possibly more philosophical than scientific (or realistically answerable). At that age I was certainly not aware of the simulation hypothesis, which seems like a good starting point, but also raises more questions. Regardless, I appreciate the clearly genuine effort behind your answer as well as the pontification it inspired, at least for me.
An aside: your comment reminded me of the “Maxwell’s Demon” Abstruse Goose comic (which sadly I can’t find to link here) and this Simpsons bit, which clearly I was able to find to link.
I want to reiterate one last time that people who try to answer questions and educate others are extremely valuable and I meant nothing negative about your comment. Thank you for responding.
IIRC, this is pretty close to what he said, except his degree was in engineering. Thank you for the response.
I also missed it in the body, as my client doesn’t do much to highlight short body posts, so I appreciate both your comment and your willingness to acknowledge your mistake.