That comparison to USD strikes me as disingenuous.
Currency is a measure of social trust; it allows social contributions to be measured in a fungible unit. Cryptocurrencies erase this concept of social trust under the purported claim that anonymous transfer of “money” is good for society, forgetting why humans created currency in the first place. Anonymity abets money laundering, illicit drug trade, human trafficking/slavery, and CSAM, along with a raft of other antisocial behaviors.
Yes, you can do all of the above with USD, but you’ll have to put a lot more effort into doing so. Hence, it is fair to lump the bad in with the good for crypto (IMO) because it’s unclear how the benefits of crypto outweigh the antisocial behavior it enables. What has society gained in return?
Our brains’ initial parse of that sentence, while sensible and probable, is incorrect. That is, the mind really wants to interpret “...for work, my website, and all...” as a list, but that leaves a dangling clause!
But the very act of making and organizing your card deck is part of the SRS! It “sucks” because you get no dopamine hit from a fresh desk, as the reward system is not yet in place.
From what perspective? The American colonies repeatedly and flagrantly ignored foreign property and intellectual rights, e.g. via laws to protect domestic but not foreign authors. Samuel Slater was called Slater the Traitor in Britain for a reason.
Unclear what you traffic scenario you are referring to, but in some localities (such as WA state) it is legal for bikes to roll through stop signs in certain scenarios. This makes sense considering a bike’s speed, its rider’s engagement, and the overall difficulty of killing a pedestrian with a bike (compared to a vehicle).
Chinese is not too difficult a language, but it’s likely very different from your native language. Chinese morphology, tense, and overall grammar are far easier to learn than most European languages. Chinese speakers are extremely forgiving too because modern Chinese speakers span dozens of dialects but all (except 东北人) learn a second dialect: Mandarin.
The characters are indeed a nuisance, but can be overcome with Anki/SRS. Chinese learners struggle with its tonal nature due to a lack of exposure to speaking/listening because they have no experience with tones. English speakers always decry Chinese tones as insurmountable as if it’s the only tonal language, but half of all languages are tonal, so it’s doable with practice.
In fact, Chinese has become more similar to Indo-European languages over the past century. Chinese now has an odd form of hypotaxis (think: conjugation, inflection, etc.), whereas it previously only had parataxis (combine two characters to generate something new). For example, 药性 (medicinal) is OG Chinese (ish), but now you have words like 科学性 and 简化, which make a lot more sense to an English speaker because they were noun-ified. Modern Chinese does this (literally) everywhere: all you see is 是, 性, 化, 的, 被. This makes the language much more amicable to an Indo-European native speaker.
Perhaps your difficulty is due to modern Chinese’s verbose (almost bureaucratic) syntax? These examples you gave make sense to me if you follow their literal reading. They sound stupid if translated to English, but not necessarily nonsensical.
> his day-to-day activity now, where he merges code
But even then...don't you think his insight into and ability to verify a PR far exceeds that of most devs (LLM or not)? Most of us cannot (reasonably) aspire to be like him.
I get your point that wetware stills matter, but I think it's a bit much to contend that more than a handful of people (or everyone) is on the level of Linus Torvalds now that we have LLMs.
These parties aren’t screwing you. They’re offering a service at a price. You pay for convenience. You may not value your time, but most do. That’s why certain gas stations command a higher price.