The way you wrote this and your previous comment above led me to believe your account is new. I checked it, 74 days at time of writing. I get the impression you haven't read the guidelines here. I like this place as it is generally civil discourse and have no qualms being the person that points you to the "In Comments" section of the guidelines.
I downvoted you due to the way you're communicating in this thread. Be kind, rewind. Review the guidelines here perhaps since your account is only a little over a year old.
I found this article useful and insightful. I don't have a bot problem at present I have an adjacent problem and found this context useful for an ongoing investigation.
Alas I work for a very large company who has a bunch of teams that makes prototypes for us to use.
However, a secondhand Quest 3 with unity in MR is the cheapest way to get started. It gives you SLAM/world frame of reference, which almost no other system does (apart from hololens)
Counterpoint: things like the Valve Index for VR simply don't behave well in this environment no matter how much I've worked on getting it there.
I'm not a novice either, $dayjob has me working on the lowest levels of Linux on a daily basis. I did linux from scratch on a Pentium 2 when I was 12. All that to say yes I happen to agree but edge cases are out there. The blanket statement doesn't apply for all use cases
IMO this is the real blindspot: it's VR support, not Photoshop, or MS Office, or CAD tools (all of which I've got running fine via Wine). I'm guessing the intersection between VR users and Wine users must be really small and I suspect it's because of this that support is so lacking.
Soulseek is likely the one you're remembering. I remember talking to people with similar collections of music. Hotline was my primary passion for quite some time but soulseek had a longer run of utility in my childhood on the nascent web.
What is logic here against the subjective internal experience you're responding to. Do I have to hold an axiom true to believe the person describing their internal experience is specifically as Chomsky proved in the language of logic?
I'm actually glad you posted this because it reminded me of a quote from Wittgenstein's page on Wikipedia [1]
> According to Wittgenstein, philosophical problems arise when language is forced from its proper home into a metaphysical environment, where all the familiar and necessary landmarks and contextual clues are removed. He describes this metaphysical environment as like being on frictionless ice: where the conditions are apparently perfect for a philosophically and logically perfect language, all philosophical problems can be solved without the muddying effects of everyday contexts; but where, precisely because of the lack of friction, language can in fact do no work at all.[259] Wittgenstein argues that philosophers must leave the frictionless ice and return to the "rough ground" of ordinary language in use. Much of the Investigations consists of examples of how the first false steps can be avoided, so that philosophical problems are dissolved, rather than solved: "The clarity we are aiming at is indeed complete clarity. But this simply means that the philosophical problems should completely disappear."
I try to tell all new programmers that ask me for advice that keeping abreast of the words of tools that are available for use is a big part of the work and shouldn't be left out. If I quit my daily / weekly trawl of what's out there, I'd surely start to atrophy.
Oh. Sounds like you're referring to Agile and Standup with capital letters. In my experience people talk about agile-with-a-capital-A and standup-with-a-capital-S and those two don't really match what actually happens in the real world, at least in my experience.
https://github.com/integrii/dvd/blob/main/cmd/dvd/dvd.go#L22...