This was by far the most effective way I went from intermediate to advanced. The key is that you can see the key sequence of how other people got to their solutions. Then you can judge whether those solutions are just a one-off niche use case or if you can put it in your tool belt of VIM dominance.
Articles like these are just terrible. I can see this misleading people who don't read the article to think that you can perform surgery with a cellphone. At best, it's a sensational PR piece.
It's true that cardboard may have viable reasons for being mentioned in this context, but the onus is on the writer to prove that this isn't a sensational piece. As the article is right now, we can only speculate on good faith that they had good reasoning to use cardboard vs existing methods that others have mentioned.
I think the key consideration should be the context in which the movies were created. Movies are made to make money and the more time a movie-maker spends on ironing out small inconsistencies, the more money they lose.
That movie was made to be relatable by a wide audience so it's no surprise that many people can have differing interpretations of the deeper meaning. This is simply one of them.
It's okay to talk about everyone working for $1 after all it has to start from somewhere right?
I think the spirit of the complaining is more of a warning to keep an eye out for the trend rather than stop these one-offs altogether, but that's a lot harder to say and act on than "stop these one-offs".
> Should plumbers be upset about their work being devalued?
The problem stems from contributions that have a big impact. Big impact can be achieved by one person contributing a large amount, or many people contributing small amounts.
Was it bad just by giving away t-shirts? I don't think so.
Was it bad just by giving away that many t-shirts? I don't think so either.
It was bad because his actions created a dependency on an unreliable source while removing the main income source that sustains reliable ones. If he subsidized the income loss of the textile industry, the consequences would not have been as devastating.
That's really the crux of the argument; giving away things for free generally takes income from dependable sources of labour. It's only when it has a big impact that people pay attention.
Going back to the topic, the same can be said about volunteering. I think it's okay if volunteering dislodges an entire industry as long as the volunteering is sustainable and reliable.
This was by far the most effective way I went from intermediate to advanced. The key is that you can see the key sequence of how other people got to their solutions. Then you can judge whether those solutions are just a one-off niche use case or if you can put it in your tool belt of VIM dominance.