345
Junior Dev VS Machine Learning
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2024
345 points (91.0% liked)
Programmer Humor
19551 readers
972 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
There are many ways to decaffeinate a coffee bean... Some more gross than others... All of them blasphemy.
And yes most of them ruin the taste of coffee.
Also it's obvious you have seen this already. https://youtu.be/yYTSdlOdkn0?si=6Z1RlexQCt2I4OI9
Yeah, well for many of us it's decaf or no coffee due to health issues. You acting like it's a foolish, childish thing is just tribalism/elitism.
And for what it's worth, I'd put my decaf vs your coffee in a heartbeat. A good roaster with quality beans is great coffee, decaf or no. Just like Hoffman said.
That's some top shelf stretching there.
People needing to limit their caffeine intake because o health issues is a "stretch"? O.o
No no, that was the only reasonable part. Everything else wrapping that was absurd though.
You sincerely think you have a better grasp on coffee than James Hoffmann?
Much more likely you haven't tried good decaf from a good roaster, tried a blind tasting, or your preparation is seriously flawed.
I'm a huge fan of James Hoffman... I don't think anyone alive understands coffee better than he does.
I live in a US Coffee Capital...
I make brilliant decaf for my pregnant wife.
My preparation is flawless in drip and espresso
You guys really don't understand subjectivity or sarcasm and are filling in a ton of the blanks.
You say "no one knows coffee better than he does", while blatantly disagreeing with his entirely empirical points in his video on decaf, that it can be made by several processes, all of them are fairly good, and the result can be masterful?
I live in a hockey capitol. That makes me nothing like an expert. Same for you.
Okay, so you make brilliant decaf. That means your point in this thread is moot?
Funny thing on that "subjectivity" is when you disagree with other people in this thread, you've plainly said they're just entirely wrong.
When someone disagrees with you, you hide behind "subjectivity".
I encourage you to introspect.
Yikes this is getting drawn out and silly, eh. I'll save us some time.
You win.
But one thing that I couldn't help but chuckle at is your interpretation of the coffee capitol point.
You live in a hockey capitol. That doesn't make you an expert, but I bet if you wanted to buy a hockey stick you would have a number of stores carrying top gear... If you wanted to see a game you probably have a number of hockey teams from pro to amateur you could go watch live.
I have direct access to three of the top 20 roasters in the country. I'm fortunate to have access to some of the best coffee in the world regardless if I'm an expert or not.
And this is sort of the point overall... You added so much of your own arguments to my position that you aren't even arguing with me or the points that I'm making.
I'm not hiding behind subjectivity, I was the one who posted the video "negating" my so called "opinions". You still think I did that as a mistake. Which I think is the second example that shows you are coming to this discussion in bad faith.
It's no wonder you recommend introspection, given you have been arguing only with your interpretation of my opinion.
"Coming up tonight: Sarcasm is hard to convey in text form, if not clearly signposted. More at eleven." /s
No, you're just clearly either a compulsive lair or a troll. Either way, your input is not appreciated
Like I said, you didn't watch the video. Hoffmann clearly stated that decaf coffee can be made well. It is a documented fact that he said that, no subjectivity required.
So how is the other person "stretching" when they claimed he said it?
It's funny, because you claim the opposite of what is said in the video.
That's the funny thing about subjectivity right?
"Blasphemy" is not really something I would consider a term that's commonly used to express subjective opinions.
That's because words on their own all have definitions. The subjectivity is created contextually. I swear it feels like I'm talking to a bot.
No need to get insulting, ma nude. Still not sure in what world your statement could be regarded as subjective in intend. Please, enlighten me.
Opinions, such as "all methods of decaffeinating coffee are blasphemy" are subjective in their very nature. What makes this more obvious is that the definition of blasphemy is entirely subjective and can't even begin to be assessed objectively until at very minimum a religious dogma is declared for the basis of evaluation.
I disagree. IMHO, the accusation of blasphemy presupposes a dogma to actually make sense.
Okay... Which one? It's pretty clear that decaffeinated coffee violates no religions that I'm aware of... And in fact for some religions would be the only allowable way to drink coffee. And if you argue that I just meant in general that it is a slight on to any God then how would you interpret that as anything other than humor or sarcasm?
Do you always feel like a victim or is it just when you aren't caffeinated enough?
... Any dogma? It's like the claim "that's illegal" presupposes a body of law. No matter which one.
That's not how legal systems work... Plenty of things are legal in one place and illegal in another. No Christians are worried about blasphemy against Zeus or Jupiter. Like wise a Zoroastrian is only concerned about blasphemy against Ahura Mazda and not Allah.
I'm claiming that the accusation or blasphemy presupposes a frame or reference. In this frame of reference, you can make objective statements. Not that this frame of reference is absolute.
In your line o reasoning, velocity would be subjective.
Velocity is not suggestive because it is defined as speed in a direction.
In your example you are only taking speed, assuming direction and stating velocity.
Velocity needs a frame of reference, though, since there is no absolute frame of reference.
This is the silliest shit I've ever discussed on the Internet. I will say kudos to you for keeping things mostly amicable. It's been awhile since I've had an argument on topicality and it's been entertaining for me. Thanks my friend, best wishes.
Dude, you clearly didn't even watch the first 30 seconds of the video because it contradicts what you say from the start
How do you gather? You think there isn't many ways to decaffeinate beans or that some of them aren't gross? Or that most ways used to decaffeinate beans doesn't make the coffee taste bad?
These are the very points James makes in the first 2/3rds of the video.
The only point that he and I might delaminate on was that all decaf is blasphemous, and that's a stretch because he never talks about the religious criminality of drinking coffee?
Why do you think I would offer a video to people about decaf that I didn't watch? Hint: I don't hate decaf coffee.
Dude, pick one and stick with it. None of this hypocrite crap