Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
Voting is open
In this case, it's over a thousand comics. It takes a bit to get going (the plot doesn't really emerge until after the, I dunno, first fifty or so?), but once it does it never really breaks stride.
Only over a thousand? Most I read have hit a good fifteen hundred or so. Well, except for the recent ones that have caught my attention, but that's probably just because I've gotten through all the good ones already.
 
No, you didn't. You just voted that others not get one scene you didn't want. It's kind of hard to read it any other way when you didn't even bother reading through the list to strip out the '22 votes' chaff.

If the reason that they voted for every option but one is that they want to avoid seeing the one, that's a valid reason, and compatible with the principle of 'vote for what you want'. It may come at the cost of any nuance to their vote, but that's their choice to make. You may not like their reason, but I don't think judging people for their (edit: valid) votes is a good practice.
 
Last edited:
If the reason that they voted for every option but one is that they want to avoid seeing the one, that's a valid reason, and compatible with the principle of 'vote for what you want'. It may come at the cost of any nuance to their vote, but that's their choice to make. You may not like their reason, but I don't think judging people for their votes is a good practice.
I'm not really judging them for the vote.

Voting all but one is valid. My original comment was that it's not necessary, and that they could vote for scenes they actually want if they choose. They argued that they were doing that. I'm arguing that they're not. Not to scold them or anything. They're not doing that. It's fine that they're not, but there's no need to pretend that they are.
 
Last edited:
Well, I haven't done it in a while but that's like the best way to fall asleep if you are an overthinker, just beautiful meaningless background noise, like shiny rain.
I'm willing to give some allowance on cases like that. I'm mostly talking about just straight up watching it and then falling asleep.
Incidentally, if you fall asleep while on the phone with someone, you're ancient.
 
This reminds me of the times I've had to hand-tune tight loops in low-level programs. After a certain point all the abstractions drop away and you're just directly manipulating the entire state at once. The steps of the algorithm are no longer separated into even individual instructions; every operation does two or three or four things at once and all of the functionality is entangled into a single inscrutable - but extremely efficient - mass.

Relevant: The Story of Mel.

The 'story of mel' is absolute nonsense glorifying a absolute shitty way to program. If you want abtractions and efficiency, may i direct you to a 'real' programing language like rust that isn't built on quicksand and ducktape?

Imagine being impressed at using a integer overflow to self modify code to a jump. No wonder he couldn't fix the bug. Not coincidentely, most operating systems and languages started to provide tools to forbid self-modifying code.
 
Last edited:
[X] Belegar, to discuss the northern Karaks and the Expedition.
[X] [ROMANCE] Journeywoman Panoramia
[X] Kasmir, to see how he's keeping himself busy in Sylvania.
[X] Eike Hochschild, to get to know your future business partner.
[X] Barak Varr, to watch the progress of the canal.
[X] [ROMANCE] Magister Johann
 
[X] [ROMANCE] Journeywoman Panoramia
[X] [ROMANCE] Elector Countess Roswita van Hal
[X] [ROMANCE] Magister Johann

I've come around on Roswita. She's cool and by now most of their relationship is not Roswita being Mathilde's old boss's daughter. I'd be happy if any of these three won.

I feel really sad for Anton though. We should really put some personal effort into finding someone for him.
 
The 'story of mel' is absolute nonsense glorifying a absolute shitty way to program. If you want abtractions and efficiency, may i direct you to a 'real' programing language like rust that isn't built on quicksand and ducktape?

Imagine being impressed at using a integer overflow to self modify code to a jump. No wonder he couldn't fix the bug. Not coincidentely, most operating systems and languages started to provide tools to forbid self-modifying code.
The Story of Mel is set in the stone age of computing, abstract programming languages were too inefficient for hardware at the time. It's true that that's a horrible way of programming now but that's because we have plenty of spare computing power to make such things unnecessary. If we tried using 'proper' programming practice on those ancient machines we'd be able to accomplish a lot less than what Mel could. And at the end of the day what the people hiring programmers cared about was what you could make computers do, not how you made them do it.
 
They actually cared quite a bit about the bug that the other guy - that could be easily be called a 'mel' by sheer experience by now - couldn't fix. This subculture adoration of 'programming monks' doing the unsafe thing at any cost is weird as hell, at any time. You could be programing in a calculator with a 5mhz processor and if your 'clever trick' crashed even 0.1% of the time and you just threw the program over the shoulder and went to do more 'genius' things else where, i wouldn't buy anything from your company.

For a long long time people using programs couldn't expect anything else, partially because the tools weren't there partially because of this attitude of the 'super programmer doesn't need no proof, or comments or intelligibility or pair programming or open source'. Now we have the first, but the second is even stronger in segments. Mythology like the 'story of mel' only propagandizes a terrible way to make software and attitude. It was bad the first time i read it in the 90's, it's even worse now.

Worst thing is that it's often spread by either freshmen or users that don't know anything about resource management in computers and complain that 'firefox takes 4gb', like they don't know about paging and the fact memory is completely useless if not used.

This is out of topic, and i won't keep it up, but needless to say, that story sucks and it sucked the very first time it was spread by someone that should have known better - not in the least because of the unfixed bug.
 
Last edited:
I feel really sad for Anton though. We should really put some personal effort into finding someone for him.
I kind of want to, but at the same time it's kind of busybodyish? Mathilde's not even living in the same polity as him any more; I'm not really sure who she'd talk to in Blutdorf or elsewhere about matchmaking. Unless he likes dwarven girls?

Oh, we could ask Julia! Spymistress for Stirland is certainly going to be familiar with the gossip about eligible noblewomen in the region.
 
I kind of want to, but at the same time it's kind of busybodyish? Mathilde's not even living in the same polity as him any more; I'm not really sure who she'd talk to in Blutdorf or elsewhere about matchmaking. Unless he likes dwarven girls?

Oh, we could ask Julia! Spymistress for Stirland is certainly going to be familiar with the gossip about eligible noblewomen in the region.
We could also aks Heidi, the empress herself as a matchmaker should make every batchelorette take notice. :thonk:
Just, a thorough background checks first, we want someone nice and friendly, not a secret axe murderer.
 
Dragon's across fiction are pretty constant my dude.

like you get the rare deviation, but most of them are pretty similar.

i mean Cython certainly do, he hordes treasures, like all dragons, he sleeps a lot, like all dragons, He wont take people fucking with his domain, like all dragons. He's see most things as fleeting because of his immense age, like all dragons.
To the contrary, dragons are some of the most ill defined and varied mythical creatures out there
Does it have legs? How many? wings? How many? Horns? Spikes? is it a great serpent? Does it breath fire? Is it associated with storms, rivers, or other bodies of water? Can it fly? Is it made out of a bunch of traits from other creatures? etc.

Sure there's a sort of stereotypical dragon that most people think of nowadays; fire breathing, 4 legged, winged reptile that might have horns and spikes attached. But even then there's a lot of grey area that varies wildly.
Is it evil? Misunderstood? Friendly? Does it just want to be left alone? Is it an animal or intelligent? Can it speak? Is it solitary? Does it hoard things? What does it hoard? Is it magical? Can it shapeshift? Is it also a wizard? etc.

Dragons are widely recognizable, but also somewhat counterintuitively they are very poorly defined, and vary wildly in how they act and what literary role they play
Sometimes they are monsters to be slain, sometimes they are gods, sometimes they are forces of nature, sometimes they are noble creatures and companions, sometimes they repositories of knowledge and wisdom

Am I being excessively pedantic? Probably :p
 
Last edited:
We could also aks Heidi, the empress herself as a matchmaker should make every batchelorette take notice. :thonk:
Just, a thorough background checks first, we want someone nice and friendly, not a secret axe murderer.
I mean, Roswita's unmarried, right?

Bam, passes background checks and nice and friendly once you get to know her. And she's an open axe wielder, not a secret one. :V
 
To the contrary, dragons are some of the most ill defined and varied mythical creatures out there
Does it have legs? How many? wings? How many? Horns? Spikes? is it a great serpent? Does it breath fire? Is it associated with storms, rivers, or other bodies of water? Can it fly? Is it made out of a bunch of traits from other creatures? etc.

Sure there's a sort of stereotypical dragon that most people think of nowadays; fire breathing, 4 legged, winged reptile that might have horns and spikes attached. But even then there's a lot of grey area that varies wildly.
Is it evil? Misunderstood? Friendly? Does it just want to be left alone? Is it an animal or intelligent? Can it speak? Is it solitary? Does it hoard things? What does it hoard? Is it magical? Can it shapeshift? Is it also a wizard? etc.

Dragons are widely recognizable, but also somewhat counterintuitively they are very poorly defined, and vary wildly in how they act and what literary role they play
Sometimes they are monsters to be slain, sometimes they are gods, sometimes they are forces of nature, sometimes they noble creatures, sometimes they repositories of knowledge and wisdom

Am I being excessively pedantic? Probably :p
When a dragon cause trouble, do you hire a dragon slayer or a dragon layer? And which is Mathilde?
 
The 'story of mel' is absolute nonsense glorifying a absolute shitty way to program. If you want abtractions and efficiency, may i direct you to a 'real' programing language like rust that isn't built on quicksand and ducktape?

Imagine being impressed at using a integer overflow to self modify code to a jump. No wonder he couldn't fix the bug. Not coincidentely, most operating systems and languages started to provide tools to forbid self-modifying code.
There's a reason I wrote that I was reminded of the times I "had to" hand-tune tight loops. In one case I was writing GBA homebrew and getting some AI to run inside a single frame was easier than redesigning the whole thing to run an online planner and cache partial plans between frames. Rust hadn't been invented yet. In another case I was writing code targeting a CPU I'd designed from the ground up for a computer engineering course. I, in my infinite boredom and genius, had earlier in the semester decided on a OISC transport-triggered architecture with extreme pipelining. The last thing I did for that class was toggle the program into an FPGA dev board using switches and a 7-segment display. Toolchain? What toolchain?

I agree with you that Mel's code is unacceptable by modern standards; it'd be cheaper to buy better hardware than it would be to spend engineer-hours dealing with the performance constraints. At work I use mostly python and lisp.
 
Last edited:
They actually cared quite a bit about the bug that the other guy couldn't fix. This subculture adoration of 'programming monks' doing the unsafe thing at any cost is weird as hell, at any time.
Given the hardware at the time they had the choice of
A) A blackjack program coded directly onto bare metal with a high probability of bugs and would be extremely difficult to debug even after a bug is found or,
B) Nothing, it would probably be impossible to code a blackjack program 'properly, the hardware in question barely has 32 KB of memory.

'Real Programming' sucked to write and it sucked to maintain but denigrating the people who practiced it is like denigrating medieval sailors for using wooden sailing ships, sure if someone today tried to travel around such a ship they would be laughed at but in the 1400s/1970s there was literally no reasonable alternative.
 
Voting is open
Back
Top