Some people at a previous job used vscode, passed their day clicking at stuff with their mouse, navigating directories via a native file explorer, using GUIs to commit their changes, using windows with no knowledge related to virtual desktop management, automating nothing etc... That wasn't no problem at all : they did their job and at the end of the day they wrote code.
But then, with the right tools you could have done what they did in half the time, minimizing all the unnecessary micro-movements with some keybindings and some editor plugins or some really good text editor.
Now, if paired with this mechanical mastery you have a good ability to pack related problems/functionalities to implement and are efficient at solving them/implementing them; then you can add some multiplier to the mechanical speed explained in the previous paragraph.
That's some weird way to think about this, but let's say the ideal instance of the project requires X lines of code; if you work faster, then you reach a higher level of expertise on the project codebase and by this excess of expertise you gain speed relatively to others which in turn makes you more expert and so on.
Except, working "fullspeed" is more tiring than working "normally" and you usually don't want to have a tornado in your team that write 50+ -major changes- commits a day and that cannot cooperate with others because they cannot follow up and are "too slow" to even review those changes.
You decide to fire "slow" workers, but then the tornado must work 9+ hours a day to keep up with your expectations and finally burn-out leaving a work that every other member of the team fails to understand, due to too much litterature to read written by some sort of alien.
So I'm fine with programming 2 to 4 hours a day, since, as an alien-tornado, I prefer my code to be read, reviewed, and understood by my peers.
What I am saying is that this conception of work is absurd. The truth is you are hired to build stuff, not for being at an office during X time.
I like fishes, that's cute.
Working 2.5 hours per day is enough for me some days to meet expectations.
If the person you work for is happy about your output, then should you care ?
If you’re okay working to such low expectations, and do not fear being replaced by automation, then that’s your prerogative.
I would not feel secure in the stability of such an easy job, nor proud of my accomplishments. I also expect that we work in very different stratums in both skill and renumeration.
I feel a difference between the rationality of a critique and the disappointment caused by disappointing human behaviors.
The paper in question is a genesis, discussing it doesn't imply you "don't mind" about all the scammed people.
The weird easter-egg-y nature of "hiding" this document inside a commercial OS makes your contribution a bit extreme; you created a imaginary bridge between two mountains.
>There is little 'european culture' left ...
That's your opinion, and it strikes me. I don't understand the difference between what you call "fossilized cultural artifacts" and "alive culture and thought". In france, there are a lot of linguistic communities that still talks local tongues, and there are some events in which people reunite themselves in order to perform some folkloric dances (not related to age). Is this a fossilized cultural artifact ?
A lot of the good films I saw the past years were from europe. I really enjoyed the contemporary scandinavian scene recently, you could try to enlarge your vision and watch different things (recommendation [0])
There's a crazy amount of artistic domains, and I can't believe that someone (as you just did) can think of having scanned successfully the whole Europe cultural practices to be allowed to say " european culture is gone".
Music, dance and visual arts are being created everyday : does it constitutes a part of what you call "culture" ?
Concerning the public intellectuals you talk about, well, they were only a diffusion channel for one part of the european culture , and I don't think their death implies the death of culture, but rather the lowering of the signal amplitude perception from USA.
>Europe is aging, it's looking backwards and has very interest in the future.
Really curious of what you call "future" here. I could be wrong, but this concept usually hides some very dogmatic opinions.
My blog is about the creation of a coding language that, once finished, could allow for the compilation of the text of the whole blog into a program that would erase the blog. Which is total nonsense.
My new blog forks your language so it still results in compilation of the text of the whole blog into a program that would erase the blog, but it's a quine, so as the blog deletes, it's simultaneously punched out on the cardpunch, a nice neat deck waiting to spawn the next iteration. Oh, hold on, looks like Banksy is calling me.
My new blog is a palindrom program that does what I said first when read, and that does what you said when read backwards.
Oh, hey, it seems like Marcel Duchamp has resurrected.
What past do you refer to ? GRs exist since 1947.
Trails didn't change a lot since then, the principle stayed the same : Red and white signs to mark the path, and "recuperation" of historical paths, made by the circulation of persons (think about Le Saint Jacques de Compostelle, which is the historical path of the pilgrims).
It never was "extreme" or "dangerous" to follow a trail without a map in france, you would go through a lot of villages where you could get some water, buy some food, ask for directions and etc...
Very logically, if I were to plan a 2 week hike without a map in the past, I would go to a village that's on a GR path, walk one week and then go back. I never felt unconscious or in danger, I had no cellphone and no map
Believe me, hiking the alpine GRs without a map is asking for trouble. The trails are very well maintained but you need to plan your days, you don’t want to be tired out at 4pm in the middle of a very rocky portion. And if you were to hit fog or heavy rain, a map can be a lifesaver.
I’m pretty sure that until the 21st century, nearly everyone doing the gr5 for example would have bought a map
Well, you picked up one of the most difficult GR, situated in one of the most lethal landscape, with one of the worst weather, of france. That's not the fairest example, because that's not representative of the relative triviality of most of GRs. (Even "difficult" ones seems trivial compared to GR5.
That's not selfish, GRs are sometimes crossing natural park in which nature and wilderness related laws are enforced, there are people that can sue you if you smoke a cigarette/walk in certain areas/throw some trash at the ground/camp in les calanques de marseille for example (the south of france is highly inflammable during summer). In order to maintain the local biodiversity, keep a minor impact of the local wilderness of these places (endangered species often), some money has to be raised, experts have to be paid to help decisions (should a trail be modified for X reasons related to what I said supra, should some trees be cut down for security reasons, should some security lanes be created to prevent fires etc...), which then requires the intervention of professionals to apply these decisions.
You also have to pay "rangers" sometimes (I don't know of many parks of france, i'm mainly talking about calanques and cevennes).
When I go climbing I have to buy a local guide documenting all the historical climbing spots; the persons that sells the guide are the one that equipped and maintened these historical routes : is it selfishness ?
To start with, the official law enforcement, and park maintenance is managed and facilitated by the state, payed by the tax payers.
Secondly, the associations like the one mentioned above, although making use of the resources of their members, are in part being bankrolled by the state. So, again, payed with tax payers' money.
Thirdly, the association, labelled an association of public benefit, should fit the following definition: "Elle n'exerce pas d'activité lucrative. Sa gestion est désintéressée. Elle ne fonctionne pas au profit d'un cercle restreint de personnes", or, after loosely translated:
1) It should not be profit driven
2) Its management should be selfless
3) It should not function at the benefit of only a restricted group of people.
And it this case, it sure sounds like point 2 and 3 are put in doubt with their patent and intellectual property fighting nonsense barring open maps from including their paths.
Beyond a recognition for the time and effort invested in the maintaining of the markings on the hiking trails they trace, it really looks like a disproportionate and misplaced application of intellectual property rights.
And taking into account that a lot of tax payers' money is making the entire endeavour possible, it would make some sense to return a bit of that value back to the tax payers by making the markings available for free in openly accessible maps.
I don't find a good solution to have to pay a license to have the right walk the path I walk everyday to go from A to B, that my grandparents walked (just as their own grandparents did etc...), a path that has been traced by the sole circulation of humans in a forest, that local people "created" and that is now part of a GR.
Maybe that's only a psychological effect in my person, because something in me is okay with the fact of paying a global tax that would fund every activity related to the maintenance of the trails and the protection of wilderness.
There can be a free permit register along the trail need to sign. This is fairly common for hiking trails in some countries. It may also assist search and rescue efforts.
If the permit only covers a small area and it's not at the trail head, through hikers will rather buy a permit that covers the whole route.
It's inevitable that people will follow parts of the trail without the paper map. Perhaps hunting geo caches. Or perhaps looking for a waterfall they saw on Google maps or some website.
If it's in OpenStreetMap, they can easily follow established trails using an app they are used to. I.e. less erosion. And when they get lost or injured, use the app to self rescue.
You don't have to buy a map, paths begins usually in villages or lead to them. Usually when I walk in an unknown place I can find some of the red signs that indicates a GR, sometimes with distances and names of places they lead to. I hiked a lot without a map, never struggled to find a GR, local people usually know about them very well.
If you want to do a through hike in the US, don’t follow this approach. You can’t believe how much bigger the place is than the anywhere in Europe.
I have hiked sections of the PCT without seeing another human for a week. Other western trails are even more desolate.
Also backcountry trails are rarely marked, except at some trailheads. The government maps were mostly made in the 1970s and contain trails that don’t exist any more (and of course don’t include newer trails).
My preference is to carry topo maps + compass and carry a small GPS for emergencies if I cannot locate myself.
In Canada the typos are quite good but have in my experience even less trail or stream information.
In both countries I recommend planning trips with someone local who knows the territory.
Yea, I think this is what is interesting about this approach.
It’s an optional tax
If you don’t have the money you can muddle along or do your research but if you have money you can just support the trails by buying a map.
Seems easy and efficient. You don’t need to charge mandatory admission and collect money (like is done in the US) you just sell an optional map in local stores. Makes sense.
