Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: D Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc,comp.os.linux.advocacy Subject: Re: GIMP 3.0.0-RC1 Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2025 11:38:24 +0100 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <0434bfdf-3cb5-8ffb-a817-a3a8046ba5ca@example.net> References: <8b262a1f-507f-ef10-e4d3-a981dca5b7d1@example.net> <655acbf6-05e5-69ff-8a44-9f7075aafa2e@example.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="8323328-1954419897-1739097505=:16712" Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="3406632"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="w/4CleFT0XZ6XfSuRJzIySLIA6ECskkHxKUAYDZM66M"; X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:65297 comp.os.linux.advocacy:685450 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323328-1954419897-1739097505=:16712 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Sat, 8 Feb 2025, Charlie Gibbs wrote: > On 2025-02-08, D wrote: > >> On Sat, 8 Feb 2025, Charlie Gibbs wrote: >> >>> On 2025-02-08, D wrote: >>> >>>> On Sat, 8 Feb 2025, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 08/02/2025 07:36, WokieSux282@ud0s4.net wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> IMHO, a lot of this is just "busy work" from >>>>>>   people looking for something to do. Their >>>>>>   idea of "better" means "better for ME - and >>>>>>   screw YOU". It's not better for the average, >>>>>>   or even professional, user. >>> >>> I always loved that description of a piece of software: >>> "It's a great improvement on its successors." >>> >>> >>> >>>> I am fascinated by the fact that when it comes to programming, there can >>>> be an enormous disconnect between academic programmers, and a guy in his >>>> room who just pounded out the code and got the work done. >>>> >>>> I'm not saying he did it in the most "elegant" way or the best documented >>>> way, but I do claim that in many instances, the guy without the official >>>> training is able to do it. >>> >>> And, in the end, his solution might be the more elegant one, >>> in that it takes all sorts of real-world factors into account. >>> >>>> Reminds me of when I went to university. I often had to help the A >>>> students with their practical assignments, and I got it done. On the >>>> theory part however, they were always the A students. >>> >>> My university computer science courses left me quite disillusioned. >>> Between my second and third years I managed to land a summer job >>> programming in a small shop in the real world. For my third year >>> I arranged my schedule so that I had Thursdays off, and continued >>> to work at my part-time programming job. There was no fourth year - >>> I dropped out and went full-time, and have been programming ever since. >> >> Were you successful? Did you become a powerful technologist with wealth >> and many women? > > I found a niche job. Not wealthy, not hurting. And one woman is enough. > I have strange ideas of success, so that'll do. Excellent! --8323328-1954419897-1739097505=:16712--