Open Source Software Community - it's about ethics in Code of Conducts

  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account


Just watched this. It's one of those situations where you kind of don't like everyone involved.

Apparently tailwind fired 75% of their staff, and are having some other financial issues they claim are related to ai. So they turn down a pull request made by someone that wanted them to make their docs more ai crawler friendly that sat around for months.

But also the ai people are claiming they are helping tailwind because it's being used more now than ever. So it's actually a good thing that they are doing it. Failing to realize that just because every vibe coded site made by some jeet using tailwind doesn't translate into money for their business.

Then the ai guy (with a faggy nose ring) makes a video response.

Also the guy making the video get's obviously mad towards the end of the video after he shows the video response.
 
Tailwind is one of the most fucking retarded technologies to have been shat out. Brought to you by mouthbreathers who are too Indian to become proficient in real CSS. Every time I see it used, I become MATI.
 
The Big Bad D said:
Tailwind is one of the most fucking retarded technologies to have been shat out. Brought to you by mouthbreathers who are too Indian to become proficient in real CSS. Every time I see it used, I become MATI.
Click to expand...
Ironically, for something created before the AI boom, it's perfect for LLMs to understand and reuse. No need for CSS, even inline, just vomit a bunch of random vaguely-correctly named classes onto the tag and it's done.
 
prollyanotherlurker said:


Just watched this. It's one of those situations where you kind of don't like everyone involved.

Apparently tailwind fired 75% of their staff, and are having some other financial issues they claim are related to ai. So they turn down a pull request made by someone that wanted them to make their docs more ai crawler friendly that sat around for months.

But also the ai people are claiming they are helping tailwind because it's being used more now than ever. So it's actually a good thing that they are doing it. Failing to realize that just because every vibe coded site made by some jeet using tailwind doesn't translate into money for their business.

Then the ai guy (with a faggy nose ring) makes a video response.

Also the guy making the video get's obviously mad towards the end of the video after he shows the video response.
Click to expand...
We have effectively entered a self-fulfilling prophecy where vibe coded jeet trash gets used by vibe coded jeet trash to make vibe coded jeet trash that gets used by....
 
The Big Bad D said:
Tailwind is one of the most fucking retarded technologies to have been shat out. Brought to you by mouthbreathers who are too Indian to become proficient in real CSS. Every time I see it used, I become MATI.
Click to expand...
Tailwind and other CSS wrappers make me legitimately MATI. CSS is so piss-fucking-easy, how does Tailwind make it any fucking easier? It's as if you do mathematics but to make it easier, you use words instead of numbers. How in the hell would that make it easier? Doiii, I can't figure out how to center a DIV. Fucking retards, there are a million-and-one fucking ways to center a fucking DIV, you're just too brain-numblingly retarded to figure it out or memorize any of the fucking solutions, fucking brainless apes. Durrr, how do I create variables in CSS, me no can look google, me need SCSS. My code sucks so bad that I need a looping function for my CSS for some fucking reason, God knows why the fuck I need to loop over a fucking STYLING FUNCTION??? Fucking annoying brainless morons. It fucking baffles me how you need LOOPING FUNCTIONS in a STYLING LANGUAGE. How fucking incompetent can you get. In my YEARS of doing CSS, I have NEVER in my fucking LIFE had to use looping functions.

CSS: 
parent{
    display: flex;
    align-items: center;
    justify-content: center;
}

CSS: 
parent{
    display: grid;
    place-items: center;
}

CSS: 
parent{
    position: relative;
}

div{
    position: absolute;
    inset: 0;
    margin: auto;
    padding: auto;
}

CSS: 
:root{
    --variable-name: "It's this piss easy to create a variable";
}

html > body div ~ p['Some classifier']::after{
    content: var(--variable-name)
}
 
XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG said:
Unironically quite a bit of formalized math is much easier to read when written out
Click to expand...
I can understand symbols, such as R, E, A, U, etc. but not mathematics like such:

Two minus eight plus four all divided by fifteen all to the power of three all to the power of zero equals?

v.s.

(((2-8+4)/15)^3)^0 = ?
 
Hakase Shinonome said:
Tailwind and other CSS wrappers make me legitimately MATI. CSS is so piss-fucking-easy, how does Tailwind make it any fucking easier? It's as if you do mathematics but to make it easier, you use words instead of numbers. How in the hell would that make it easier? Doiii, I can't figure out how to center a DIV. Fucking retards, there are a million-and-one fucking ways to center a fucking DIV, you're just too brain-numblingly retarded to figure it out or memorize any of the fucking solutions, fucking brainless apes. Durrr, how do I create variables in CSS, me no can look google, me need SCSS. My code sucks so bad that I need a looping function for my CSS for some fucking reason, God knows why the fuck I need to loop over a fucking STYLING FUNCTION??? Fucking annoying brainless morons. It fucking baffles me how you need LOOPING FUNCTIONS in a STYLING LANGUAGE. How fucking incompetent can you get. In my YEARS of doing CSS, I have NEVER in my fucking LIFE had to use looping functions.

CSS: 
parent{
    display: flex;
    align-items: center;
    justify-content: center;
}

CSS: 
parent{
    display: grid;
    place-items: center;
}

CSS: 
parent{
    position: relative;
}

div{
    position: absolute;
    inset: 0;
    margin: auto;
    padding: auto;
}

CSS: 
:root{
    --variable-name: "It's this piss easy to create a variable";
}

html > body div ~ p['Some classifier']::after{
    content: var(--variable-name)
}
Click to expand...
Have you tried <table align=center> ?
 
Hakase Shinonome said:
CSS is so piss-fucking-easy, how does Tailwind make it any fucking easier?
Click to expand...
It's not really easier. The advantage of Tailwind is that it requires less typing, and the style source is in the same place as the target element. It's great for quick prototyping; no need to think about class names or jump to-and-from style tags/files. That's all.

I don't use it for real projects as it doesn't provide any practical benefits for me. It's a kind of abstraction over CSS (just like what React is to the JS DOM API) without removing any of CSS' complexity, all while the generated CSS is a bunch of non-debugable garbage in the browser's inspector. HTML/CSS/JS is already high-level enough, no need for anything "fancy" on top.
 
Hakase Shinonome said:
I can understand symbols, such as R, E, A, U, etc. but not mathematics like such:

Two minus eight plus four all divided by fifteen all to the power of three all to the power of zero equals?

v.s.

(((2-8+4)/15)^3)^0 = ?
Click to expand...
That's the way that it was done in 16 century and it was retarded - symbols make everything easier at the expense of initial upfront investment. If you want to convince yourself of that pick up any logic heavy book that is quite limited in it's use of symbols(such as for example Robinson's nonstandard analysis) and try to rewrite content of random page in symbolic form.
 
WielkiWapiesz2137 said:
symbols make everything easier at the expense of initial upfront investment
Click to expand...
The problem is that the operational approach is inconsistent and accretionary. If we translate @XL xQgg?QcQCaTYDMjqoDnYpG 's example to something like S-expressions,

Code: 
(forall
  g
  (thereexists (ai aj)
    (implies
      (not (box (or (u g ai) (u g aj))))
      (not-equal n empty-set))))

we see how much needless notation there is, and how arbitrary the choices are.

∀ the operator has arity 2, is prefix notated, and arguments are separated with space.

Do I read ¬◻ as two operators or one? I wrote them as two in my S-exp. OTOH, LLM thinks the meaning was "it is not necessary that". But ¬ is "not", and parser hangs at disambiguation. ◻ is ALSO used as a placeholder when a font doesn't have a glyph. More disambiguation.

Then we have function/relation expression: U(g,ai). U is a binary operator, prefix-notated, and arguments are delimited with brackets and commas.

We have implication and or operators, infix notated.

"implies" has higher implicit order of operations than "not equals".

I could go on here, but my point is that this form of mathematical symbology has a horrible design that obscures as much as it illuminates. It is accepted by academia non-critically because of tradition, but that's about the stupidest way to do it. Metamath is trying to improve things, but I guess it's too new for stodgy-ass math fags to care much about.
 
Last edited:
analrapist said:
QUOTE
Click to expand...
It is clear that you haven't done much symbolic mathematics - the precedence rules are derived from practical usage, and it would be clear to you if you tried writing many of them by hand, as then you will quickly discover that the usual logical precedence rules vastly reduce the number of brackets that you need to write.
Mathematical notation is optimized for handwriting and for equation solving - the design of notation for objects often interplays with its properties, as is especially evident in calculus. This is also evident by the fact that different fields of mathematics use different notations optimized for the domain that they are working in.
While S-Exps are nice for their regular and simple design, your hand would go numb if you tried writing anything in them for a prolonged amount of time, and you wouldn't be able to spot regularities as easily as you would using regular notation.
The choices are far from arbitrary, as the process of picking notation is similar to evolution, with each mathematician making up notation on the spot when there is a lack of it or the current one is inadequate. As a result, only notation that is convenient to work with survives.
 
WielkiWapiesz2137 said:
It is clear that you haven't done much symbolic mathematics
Click to expand...
This is actually my academic focus. The degree I completed was in foundations. Hard to get into without powerleveling. Let's just say that Russell and Whitehead have unaddressed problems that are resolved elsewhere in literature. But Goedel has thrown mathematics into a cargo cult where many/most of the folks "doing the work" really aren't any more.

WielkiWapiesz2137 said:
if you tried writing many of them by hand,
Click to expand...
Yes, this is the origin of their accretion.

WielkiWapiesz2137 said:
different fields of mathematics use different notations optimized for the domain
Click to expand...
Overstated. Everyone wants to be Russell and Whitehead.

WielkiWapiesz2137 said:
your hand would go numb if you tried writing anything in them for a prolonged amount of time
Click to expand...
This is a laughable comment that shows zero familiarity with non-mathematical pedagogy. My first, incomplete major was in biochemistry. In a lot of the biological niches of that major, you sit down in class and you don't stop writing for an hour. In math, there are a handful of points summarized in a few lines of notation that you spend most of the class going over.

WielkiWapiesz2137 said:
only notation that is convenient to work with survives
Click to expand...
🌈🌈🌈
This is as informed as saying that in Windows, only the UI that was convenient for users survives.

The reality is that Metamath's approach is the first one to actually rethink the notational problem and get some traction. I notice you failed to engage with my mention of Metamath before. When you understand what the Metamath guys are doing, it lines up with everything in my last post.
 
Last edited:
Theo had another retard moment and this one is a lot funnier than last time.

First some random guy made a post making fun of Theo.

1768204554959.png

Theo then comes up with the retarded idea of framing a 1v1 competitive programming contest as both something that proves programming ability as well as being some kind of physical fight, then goes off about how actually being mean to faggots means you don't know how to program.

1768204719163.png1768204826940.png1768204934801.png1768205003426.png

And in the end, Theo admits defeat realizing he cannot win.

1768205065992.png
 

Attachments

  • 1768204497507.png
    1768204497507.png
    325.7 KB · Views: 185
Hakase Shinonome said:
Tailwind and other CSS wrappers make me legitimately MATI. CSS is so piss-fucking-easy, how does Tailwind make it any fucking easier? It's as if you do mathematics but to make it easier, you use words instead of numbers. How in the hell would that make it easier? Doiii, I can't figure out how to center a DIV. Fucking retards, there are a million-and-one fucking ways to center a fucking DIV, you're just too brain-numblingly retarded to figure it out or memorize any of the fucking solutions, fucking brainless apes. Durrr, how do I create variables in CSS,
Click to expand...
You don't understand, I NEED to check firefox and chromium browsers because of the inconsistency, plus I just bought a mac just so I can check oh Safari works for my website BRooooOO.

Also with Tailwind, Sass, Bootstrap, Bulma and Pure, I can type in less CSS and gain MORE out of them, because CSS is more tedious to code man.

In all seriousness, all I did was watching Bro Code video on HTML and CSS and I was good, it looked like shit, but didn't need java, unlike websites like redot where scrolling and navigation feels like ass.
 
Max Weber said:
Yep, feels like ass. Let's try disabling scripts...
View attachment 8409436
Ah, of course. Imagine a static page having content that works without JS. What a silly idea.
Click to expand...
Do these faggots not know a single idea of compatibility and accessibility? The text is there, they're just so incompetent with CSS that they don't know how to use THE FUCKING @KEYFRAME FEATURE WHICH IS A NATIVE CSS PLUGIN. They use some shitty library like AnimationJS or some shit.


1768226431821.png

I'm also baffled at this, what's the point of doing this? The image its referring to works fine as a standalone image link, why make it so convoluted? Which Jeet produced this bafflingly bad code?
1768226630346.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom