The reason I’m inclined to turn to online dating is because the real me is someone whose dream life would be spending most of his days sitting around with a good friend playing with cats. It’s not like I have no solo interests at all, they’re just not ones that can form a connection by doing them in public. Sometimes I read math, I have papers on the arXiv on category theory and categorical homotopy theory, but I’m out of academia right now so that’s not a way to connect with real people.

I absolutely love talking to people and forming connections, but just with one other person at a time, otherwise I get behind the conversation and go into deep introversion. I like getting to listen to someone tell their stories and talk about themselves. One of my favorite activities is reading books out loud with a friend. I don’t know how to go out into the real world and just do that with one other person. Online I can, and have made some wonderful connections. It’s just that dating apps specifically look like a nightmare.

If I were really into hiking or whatever I would be all about living that out. Unfortunately, the person I am is someone who would be doing activities as a means to socialize, rather than the other way around. Doing those things would very much not be the real me. It’s not easy to live a solitary life for an extended period and not dream about more, and those dreams start to feel like an ulterior motive if I’m seeking out new connections.

I don’t think at all about what “top” should mean in a dating pool, it hadn’t even crossed my mind, so I’m not sure why you’re bringing that up. I don’t care about whether I find someone in a top percentile of anything, I just want to find someone who is empathetic and who I connect with.

I’m going to start dating again sometime soon, so this is something I’ve been thinking about a lot.

I hate that if I go on an app and make a contact, the ostensible purpose will be to date. When that’s the purpose, at some point an evaluation will have to be made. Either that purpose is met or it isn’t. You could have a conversation about being friends or considering your options, but I’m sure starting that conversation feels awkward and hurtful. It would feel like downgrading them from the original intent behind meeting.

Not starting that conversation could be delaying the dreams of two people though, so there would be a time crunch to make a decision before I might be ready. It feels like this will inevitably end up with throwing aside people who could be great to have as friends.

A connection shouldn’t be a decision, it should be something that happens. I’d rather just hang out with someone with the expectation that we’re hoping to be friends, and if there is a connection we’ll see it in each other sooner or later. Unfortunately for me, striking up conversations with single women to be friends with while having the thought of going further in the back of my mind might as well be the definition of creeper behavior.

When I lived alone I was great about cleaning up any messes made in memory, but dust bunnies had eternal lifespans.

I think the person who drew this comic was born into the wrong generation. (They’re a boomer at heart.)

Any impact protest voters might have had could be outweighed a thousandfold by nonvoters. Why call out protest voters unprompted as a cause of an election swing when their impact is a drop in an ocean?

Half the country didn’t vote. If 1% of them leaned Biden they would still have had more impact than protest voters, and I feel like the percentage leaning Biden might have been slightly higher than 1%.

I feel like I see protest voters called out 300x as much as nonvoters and I can never understand why it’s so disproportionate.

Yeah I opened the door to the wrong car once before and almost got in. I can picture myself getting as far as sitting down, but I can’t picture myself realizing and then thinking “hey there’s no rush so I should pull out my phone to take a photo of this dog before leaving”.

I’m relieved because I saw this post and assumed it meant in a more serious way than normal.

The user frequently posts and comments about NFTs with a gradual change in language usage indicative of emotions closely matching the five stages of grief. Posts often contain strong opinions and may be provocative.

The user frequently posts and comments strong opinions that are sometimes provocative about the movie “Total Recall”, featuring Arnold Schwarzenegger. Posts often contain strong opinions and may be provocative.

The user occasionally posts and comments on news and hobby subreddits, but has reliably logged on to comment “dm me” on multiple new gonewild posts every day for the past several years. Posts often contain strong opinions and may be provocative.

The user frequently brings up wholly unprompted that they once scored 137 on an IQ test they paid for, but puts heavy emphasis on how much they don’t care every single time. Posts often contain strong opinions and may be provocative.

The user frequently posts and comments overly long diatribes that are only tangentially relevant to the actual topic, and then deletes them the next day after finally reading the room. Posts often contain strong opinions and may be provocative.

This is a GPL project. Other than restrictions on relicesnsing, the one thing the GPL doesn’t allow is redistributions with the same name and logo, because anyone could rebuild the source code with malware added and the developer would be perceived as responsible.

You, today, can literally rebuild strawberry with a changed logo and name, and write “my program exactly strawberry except with a changed logo and name” and make that repository publicly available for free and it cannot be taken down as long as it is licensed the same way. No developers are losing sleep over lost sales from piracy of their GPL program. Otherwise they would not use the GPL in the first place.

If a developer sees that their program is being rehosted on codeberg with the same name and logo, what steps do you think they should take to verify that the binaries being shared were not rebuilt from the publicly available source code with a cryptominer added? I can’t think of a way to prevent that other than requiring a name and logo change and taking it down otherwise. It’s not enough to verify just once, because the new code author could change a legit binary to an infected one at any time.

And, again, there is no target audience for this “scam”. What do you believe might motivate the kind of customer who would regret purchasing this to pay for it in the first place? There is no need to litigate possible reasons why something might be a malicious moneymaking scheme when there is no imaginable target that would be victimized.

Which is the reason I thought it was obvious that no one will pay that without a sincere affinity for the project in some way beyond just using the app itself. Who do you imagine would pay here just to get access to the player? You’re talking about this like it’s a scam, but a scam has an intended target audience that we can at least imagine.

I can’t picture someone choosing to buy a $60 subscription to this with no reason other than being a windows user who is dead-set on using strawberry over any other music player. There’s no way the devs are raking in cash from windows users. They’ll maybe get a couple people who like strawberry because they are already foss advocates and are forced to use windows on one of their pcs, ie people who already understand what strawberry’s development priorities will be and also understand that what they are buying could be built from source code without paying.

It’s essentially a policy to ignore those operating systems except when someone cares enough to make a donation, under the reasonable assumption that bug reports from donors will still be worth their time. Windows users who have no knowledge about the project beyond “it plays music” will not shell out $60 by mistake. Literally no one is aware of strawberry’s existence but unaware of alternatives.

What is wrong with this policy? Strawberry is GPL, this sounds like the dev is committed enough to FOSS to not care too much about issues that come up on proprietary operating systems. This is very obviously not going to bring in a lot of money, how many people do you picture using windows or mac who think strawberry is so much better than other options that it’s worth paying for? They’re not advertising this in any way, there’s no plot to trick poor souls into paying.

It strikes me as an easy and effective way to dismiss without argument bugfix requests on operating systems the developer doesn’t care to touch. It’s saying we don’t want to neglect any users on other platforms that sincerely care about our project, but otherwise we just want to prioritze FOSS, so let’s write off essentially all proprietary OS users while providing an avenue in case someone actually does care about our project that much.

Telling my five-year-old that if they can beat Ecco the Dolphin in front of me I will take them out for ice cream, but I’m not sitting down to watch more often than once a week.

Should corporate media, from any company, be treated as inherently more trustworthy?

Never thought about this before but the amount of extra exercise a heavy snow adds to a cat’s normal walk is loosely proportional to its weight.

RIP. Gone, but not forgotten.

He also had a Christmas-themed RV at one point, but he totaled it in a horrific accident.