If you create a new project from scratch, yes, you can enable it project-wide. If you have a project which has a bunch of code predates nullable reference types, and you enable it project wide, you’ll have a billion warnings about it. Also, they’re warnings and not errors by default, which just encourages developers to either ignore or suppress them.

So the reality is that you need to remember when you’re making new classes to add the attribute, and then deal with external stuff - which isn’t always clearly marked whether it’s nullable or not unless it’s using attributes, by the way… just such a total mess.

They should have just gone with something more like Rust’s “Option” type. Would have been clearer for codebases that have to deal with a mix. They also could have clearly and decisively deprecated non-nullable reference types and just told people they were going to remove support in some future version so we could all migrate to them properly like we’ve done for .NET Core/.NET 5+.

C# is pretty good generally - I know it far better than any other and it pays my bills! - but it certainly has its weak points. Particularly around the newer features, a lot of them feel really rushed and just kind of shitty.

The one I hate the most is the whole “nullable” pattern. It’s a total mess. Having to mark up files as #nullable enable, having to mark methods with a bunch of attributes, and the way that it works differently if it’s a value type or a reference type, it’s just so half-baked.

If you spend some time with a more modern language like Rust or Swift then you’ll quickly start to notice C#’s weaknesses.

Dude, who even cares if it’s better? Why would you ever willingly give Microsoft even 1% of a chance to yet again gain some market share that they can abuse?

Fuck Edge, and fuck Chromium, too. Librewolf or Firefox, accept no lesser browsers.

Sorry, I probably should have explained better, it’s a bit of intentionally misusing the meaning of the term “value” for a joke - the original greentext said “25% of the value of the food”, so if you think of the amount of money required to purchase the raw ingredients and the labour required to create the final meal, that could be considered 100% of the food’s value. So if the food cost $5 to make, the company would sell it at $12.50 to get 250% of the “value” of the food.

But the term “value” usually refers to whatever the customer is willing to pay in exchange for a product, so the joke has an extra meaning - the CEO demands to be paid 2.5x more than anyone is actually willing to pay for it.

Ironically though, CEOs getting paid more than the value of any of the actual sales they generate isn’t uncommon, especially in tech. There are a number of economic sectors (like tech) that function effectively as ponzi schemes. “Venture capitalist” firms invest in tech companies which never actually generate a profit, in the hopes that they will at some point hit it big and make a shitload of profit - which does happen, every now and again: Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc.

Eventually, most tech companies reach a point where they’re pretty much about to collapse, then they’re bought out by some other company - either a larger tech company that wants to acquire their intellectual property, or some other company to strip them of assets or just hold onto the company for some other purpose.

The majority of the VC-funded tech sector is completely unprofitable and held up entirely by investment. For example, OpenAI has billions of dollars worth of debt and has never made any kind of profit.

We are well overdue for this bubble bursting and having another crash akin to the .com bubble

Except instead of 25%, it’s 250%.

To be fair, it was probably some hardware issue. I had endless problems with my old Nvidia GTX 580 which I would have been using at the time. And yeah, it was quite a while ago :P

Thanks for the really comprehensive reply. The feeling I’m kind of getting from these comments is that neither GIMP nor Krita is really capable of acting as a replacement for Photoshop yet. I know that GIMP is capable and fully featured, but when I last tired it, I could not bear how much it crashed or locked up, and like you implied, the default UI is absolutely fucking garbage. Being totally honest, I don’t think it’s defensible how bad it is - Photoshop lets you customise the UI way, way more than you probably think, it has easily half a dozen preset layouts for different tasks/workflows.

Krita looks quite nice, giving it a quick look, but like you said, it’s very obviously designed for painting and not design. Not all design can be done in vector format unfortunately!

Maybe I will get around to giving GIMP 3 a shot and trying to figure out how to use it. I want an open source replacement to the Adobe suite so, so badly. But I feel like I just can’t make the huge compromises required for that, yet.

So, real talk, be completely honest with me - how usable is GIMP these days? I’m not trying to pick a fight, I think it’s great that GIMP exists, but while I may not be a professional artist, I am a developer with an interest in graphical design and I would say that I am an advanced user of the Adobe Creative Suite tools - the main three that I use being Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign.

I would be willing to learn to use GIMP to replace Photoshop, and Inkscape to replace Illustrator, for example, but only if they’re actually good enough to put to real, productive use.

I need my tools to get out of the way and let me work. If it crashes and loses my work EVER, then it is completely beyond consideration for me. If it’s good enough for light users but not really ready for professional use, then I don’t think I can really consider switching.

I do not use any of the 3D or AI features of any of those tools, if that helps.

I would really appreciate your opinions and advice. Please don’t be optimistic - I know it’s hard sometimes to be critical about open source software because of our ideological beliefs, but please try your best to be realistic.

Oh, and if you’re going to just tell me to try it, please try to contain that impulse. It would be a huge undertaking for me to relearn basically everything about how I work with these tools, so if I went through all that just to find that I couldn’t actually make use of them because they’re not ready yet, it would be a huge waste of time and energy, both of which I have in quite short supply these days.

Thank you so much for your time :)

There’s plenty of speculation that YouTube has never turned a profit. We have no way to know for sure, though.

TikTok is quite different since it’s shorts only. I can totally see that being a viable model, because you can more comfortably cram ads between pieces of content. That’s why YouTube is pushing shorts so heavily.

Nebula is propped up by private investment. I had a quick look and found SEC filings which indicate they have raised over $9 million dollars in private investment in the past 3 years.

Patreon has almost no video hosting compared to how much revenue they have.

I understand how you feel, and you’re not totally wrong - society is changing and shifting power away from men towards historically marginalised groups.

The hopelessness and pain that men is feeling is coming from capitalism, though. It’s corporations stealing your future.

The thing is that men held almost all of the power historically, and a small shift away from men doesn’t mean that women have extreme power now. Don’t let yourself be scammed by the rich and wealthy into fighting their battles for them.

You need to recognise your true enemy.

I mean any free video streaming platform, including YouTube.

deleted by creator

The same is true of every free video streaming service. They are not viable stand-alone businesses. They can only ever operate at a loss. Therefore their main use is as a propagandists tool, to control and shape narratives.