It's bad for me, but not for that reason.

It's bad for me because I piss a whole hour or two of my morning away doomscrolling. That makes me late to work. So I end up staying later to make up lost time, I get home late, and then I wonder why I have no time at the end of the day to do anything...

I'm doing it right now, in fact. I will stop.

I love The Polar Express.

The most widely hated thing about it is the mocap. Not much to say here, I'm just straight-up not bothered by it. I think it looks fine. It's not incredibly expressive like a stylized animated film could be, but it doesn't look actively bad to me in any way.

The way the titular express inexplicably gains and loses rolling stock scene by scene and behaves in absurd ways like bending around the mountain are a common punchline. "BuT iT's A mAgIc TrAiN!!!" doesn't really solve it for me either. But on a casual viewing it's mostly inoffensive. A silly curiosity.

Some say the plot of the film spends too much time aimlessly noodling around and throwing in needless filler scenes. Meh. If you ask me that's where all the meat of the film is. The actual plot of the film has nothing interesting to say. "Kid doesn't believe in Santa. Magic Christmas hijinks ensue. Kid believes in Santa now. The end." Riveting. Nah, the so-called "filler" is absolutely the meal here.

The fact that the film literally has five named characters, and the main character isn't one of them is hilarious. To even get to that number you have to count both the Scrooge puppet and the kid who the elves were monitoring in a single scene as characters, and after that, one of the remaining three is Santa Claus. Just more weight to my point that the story doesn't matter, lmao.

Say what you will about the animation, but the cinematography is incredible. So many dynamic long-track camera shots from interesting angles. Especially whenever the steam locomotive is on screen. God, steam locomotives are so fucking cool. I don't even care that it's full of inaccuracies if you actually look up close. They put a lot of effort into it and that effort shows. It's quite the treat.

The set design of the North Pole is fantastic. It's admittedly kinda fucked that it's modeled after a real world Pullman company town, but I guess it's appropriate as a joke about the whole Santa's workshop thing while also incorporating a neat little nod to real life railroad lore. Beyond that, it's blindingly radiant of all that Victorian-era charm that most of the modern secular Christmas tradition is born from. The serene night snow amidst the rustic red brickwork illuminated by glowing amber gaslamps... augh, it's so aggressively cozy!

All the pneumatic and other steampunk-adjacent elf tech is a treat as well. The film is certainly no slouch in breathing its own unique spin of whimsy into Santa's toy factory. It's not the most whimsical out there, but it's definitely putting in work.

Alan Silvestri's score is phenomenal. It's all delightfully extra. Every single song in the film that's an original composition is a banger and every song that isn't an original composition for the film is part of that time-tested canon of hits from the 50s and 60s. I think a lot of people are fed up sick of the latter but, I dunno, I grew up listening to them on my Now That's What I Call Christmas CD, and to me their sound is synonymous with that warm, nostalgic holiday cheer I get from the season. Even if I don't get around to actually watching the movie, you know damn well I'm putting The Polar Express's soundtrack in my December shuffle.

Genuine S tier Christmas film. Well worth every single fault.

It's not states blocking porn sites. It's states treating porn site companies similarly to bars. "If we catch you serving minors, we're gonna sue the shit out of you."

The only legally airtight way to know you're not serving minors is to check valid IDs for every visitor. Just like a bar. But since doing that for a website is a huge burden and still a tremendous risk, companies like Pornhub aren't playing ball. Instead of complying with the new laws, they're simply choosing to refuse service to any user from one of these hostile states. Can't get in trouble for serving minors from certain states if you don't serve anyone from those states at all.

There is no such thing as a free and benevolent product with an advertising budget.

That's it? That's the whole thing? This is what all the censorship buzz is all about? This reads like an unremarkable angsty Reddit comment. Every single social platform is filled with countless of these.

I guess this is qualitatively different because this is him describing something he actually did after the fact rather than the meaningless posturing most other people do. At that point though, is it still even "inciting violence"? The violence was already incited. I don't see him explicitly threatening more or rallying others to do more. "Here's why I did the thing" is not the same thing as "I'm going to do the thing" or "you should do the thing, too".

The censorship of this is stupid. I hope this gets Streisand'd to the heavens.

I've personally always loathed the global menu bar paradigm of macOS. Having a menu bar that's wholly detatched from the currently open window that is context-aware based on which window has focus always felt like an irritating speed bump to me. My mind feels like the OS itself is hiding things from me by only allowing me to see a single app's menu bar at a time.

But then again, I have no objective qualms with it. I'm sure I could adapt to it. When have I realistically needed to see more than one menu bar at once? I can't name a time. I'm probbably just pearl-clutching at the perceived arresting of my agency to do things when in fact I'm losing effectively nothing.

At any rate, we agree it's a sure sight better than the shitshow that is GTK. "Hm? Window decorators and shit? Nahhh, those are your problem. Go roll your own." For the flagship windowing toolkit of the GNOME Project, the DE I'd consider the closest in philosophy to what macOS has going on, that was a rather strange position to take.

If adblockers would allow ads that adhere to the acceptable ads criteria, the world would be a better place. Less paywals, less ads and maybe some companies would pay their employees a little bit more.

I disagree. The system may have began in earnest goodwill, but financial incentive inevitably erodes goodwill. ABP becomes incentivized to adapt its definition of "acceptable" based on potential revenues they stand to gain from increasingly persuasive advertisers. Your vision of a better world under this system is at best temporary.

The alternative model, simply paying for goods and services directly, is a far more robust solution.

I recognize three kinds of comments that have different purposes.

The first kind are doc block comments. These are the ones that appear above functions, classes, class properties, methods. They usually have a distinct syntax with tags, like:

/*
 * A one-line description of this function's job.
 *
 * Extra details that get more specific about how to use this function correctly, if needed.
 *
 * @param {Type} param1
 * @param {Type} param2
 * returns {Type}
 */
function aFunctionThatDoesAThing(param1, param2) {
    // ...
}

The primary thing this is used for is automatic documentation generators. You run a program that scans your codebase, looks for these special comments, and automatically builds a set of documentation that you could, say, publish directly to a website. IDEs can also use them for tooltip popups. Generally, you want to write these like the reader won't have the actual code to read. Because they might not!

The second kind is standalone comments. They take up one or more lines all to themselves. I look at these like warning signs. When there's something about the upcoming chunk of code that doesn't tell the whole story obviously by itself. Perhaps something like:

/* The following code is written in a weird way on purpose.
I tried doing <obvious way>, but it causes a weird bug.
Please do not refactor it, it will break. */

Sometimes it's tempting to use a standalone comment to explain what dense, hard-to-read code is doing. But ideally, you'd want to shunt it off to a function named what it does instead, with a descriptive doc comment if you can't cram it all into a short name. Alternatively, rewrite the code to be less confusing. If you literally need the chunk of code to be in its confusing form, because a less confusing way doesn't exist or doesn't work, then this kind of comment explaining why is warranted.

The last kind are inline comments. More or less the same use case as above, the only difference being they appear on the same line as code, usually at the very end of the line:

dozen = 12 + 1; // one extra for the baker!

In my opinion, these comments have the least reason to exist. Needing one tends to be a signal of a code smell, where the real answer is just rewriting the code to be clearer. They're also a bit harder to spot, being shoved at the ends of lines. Especially true if you don't enforce maximum line length rules in your codebase. But that's mostly personal preference.

There's technically a fourth kind of comment: commented-out code. Where you select a chunk of code and convert it to a comment to "soft-delete" it, just in case you may want it later. I highly recommend against this. This is what version control software like Git is for. If you need it again, just roll back to it. Don't leave it to rot in your codebase taking up space in your editor and being an eyesore.

There are exactly three kinds of manpages:

1. Way too detailed
2. Not nearly detailed enough
3. There is no manpage

I will take 1 any day over 2 or 3. Sometimes I even need 1, so I'm grateful for them.

But holy goddamn is it awful when I just want to use a command for aguably its most common use case and the flag or option for that is lost in a crowd of 30 other switches or buried under some modal subcommand. grep helps if you already know the switch, which isn't always.

You could argue commands like this don't have "arguably most common usecases", so manpages should be completely neutral on singling out examples. But I think the existence of tl;dr is the counterargument.

Tangent complaint: I thought the Unix philosophy was "do one thing, and do it well"? Why then do so many of these shell commands have a billion options? Mostly /s but sometimes it's flustering.

The meme format implies she catfished you with the promise of "Netflix and chill" at her house only to pull a gun on you.

In particular, she wants you to review and merge that goddamn pull request she made to your open source project repo two months ago that finally fixes that one really annoying bug.

I mean, yeah, kind of. In the same way pilots fly planes out of a stubborn sense of pride for knowing what all the flight deck controls do.