This is what I tell myself every time I find out the hard way what documented parts of Visual Basic didn’t make it into VBScript.

My point is that the described scenario - “all money not absolutely required for existence is in the hands of the bourgeoisie” - hasn’t happened under free market systems as often as it has in communist/“state capitalist” countries like the Soviet Union.

I’m sorry I got you mixed up with the other person. But I find it interesting they haven’t answered that question yet.

That sounds an awful lot like an authoritarian state seizing control of the economy (for example, the Soviet Union). That most certainly didn’t happen through free market forces.

And I notice you still haven’t answered my question. Why is that? I think it would be pretty simple to answer, wouldn’t it? (Edit: got the wrong username)

We’re competing for people’s cash. If we do a good job at getting it, we get more of it. But how do you define “win”?

Also, please answer my question. If there is no competition, then how do you have anything other than a monopoly?

Preface: If all you want is to get a simple script/program going that will more or less work for your purposes, then I understand using AI to make it. But doing much more than this with it will not help you.

If you want to actually learn to code, then using AI to write code for you is a crutch. It’s like trying to learn how to write an essay by having ChatGPT write the essays for you. If you want to use an API in your code, then you’re setting yourself up for greater failure the more you depend on AI.

Case in point: if you want to make a module or script for Foundry VTT, then they explicitly tell you not to use AI, partly because the models available online have outdated information. In fact, training AI on their documentation is explicitly against the terms of service.

Even if you do this and avoid losing your license, you run a significant risk of getting unusable code because the AI hallucinated a function or method that doesn’t actually exist. You will likely wind up spending more time scouting the documents for what you actually want to do than if you’d just done it yourself to begin with.

And if the code works perfectly now, there’s no guarantee that it will work forever, or even in the medium term. The software and API receive updates regularly. If you don’t know how to read the docs and write the code you need, you’re screwed when something inevitably gets deprecated and removed. The more you depend on AI to write it for you, the less capable you’ll be of debugging it down the line.

This begs the question: why would you do any of this if you wanted to make something using an API?

If we don’t have competition, how will that be anything other than monopoly?

The APRS website hasn’t even started using HTTPS yet.

Those people are stupid. The entire point of having so many limits distros is so that every use case is covered. I’ve used Ubuntu, Mint, Fedora, Arch, Void, even dabbled in Gentoo, and I can tell you that there’s a valid reason to use pretty much all of them, and also valid reasons not to use any particular one of them. “You do you” should be the dogma of the Linux community, not “You do me.”

I don’t know about Hunt, but War Thunder and Dota have official Linux clients.

• Short term interest: this is just human nature. All economic models work around human nature and desires. People desire short-term gains in pretty much any endeavor. If this was a communist society, they’d still rush to get this thing out as fast as possible so they could meet state quotas/meet whatever other incentive is being offered to finish the job. The problem comes not from the motivations, but how they respond to it. Rushing deadlines and ignoring the need for testing and quality code is a universal human constant.
• Commercial focus: we have a much better idea of how much an endeavor, product, service, etc. will cost under capitalism because we have a decentralized and automatic way to calculate its value in the form of prices. Miscalculations - or simple human errors, like pushing bad code by accident - happen though, and hopefully this company has learned that prioritizing pushing something out can risk losing them money vs. testing it and coming out with a quality product.
• Antagonist interests: this is another question of short-term vs. long-term interests. Say you have a factory. If you crank up the machines to double speed, you’re potentially doubling your production, right? It isn’t that simple, actually. You can end up with a lot more workplace accidents that way, which will destroy your productivity extremely quickly. Same deal here. This will, hopefully, be a lesson learned by the industry in not pushing garbage code. M$ can’t serve ads to people who can’t boot their PCs, and will instead lose boatloads of money suddenly having to fulfill tech support contracts because of their screw-up, for example. Crowdstrike is going to have its competitors look a lot more appealing from here on out because they’ve been exposed as fools. (If they have no competitors - IT people, this is your sign!) Mistakes will happen until the end of time, of course, but that doesn’t mean fat-fingering the keyboard is a fault of the Western economic system.

Capitalism is, in essence, the ability for people to exchange their goods freely. It isn’t dependent on corporations or some weird hierarchy of managers and workers. Those are facts of living in this system, but it isn’t a direct consequence of “capitalism.” If everyone worked only for themselves and produced something to bring to the exchange, that would still be capitalism.

What does an economic system have to do with bad IT decisions?

I lost count of how many specific part numbers of defective Apple products he rattled off with the same design flaw, but that was a stunning display. Just exposed that they know these things are problems and just don’t care, because people will keep buying their products.