People literally die of heat exhaustion and legislation is being discussed now about mandatory AC in care homes. You and others on the "AC is far right" brigade are the polarising commentators here, not us.
But that circles back to my original comment: Should people use only the absolutely minimum heating needed to survive, or is it okay if they have some comfort also?
You can survive the winter in a house with a 5 centigrade temperature by putting on a lot of clothing and continuously drinking hot tea, huddling together under thick blankets. So would you have a problem with those who heat their houses more than that on this warming planet?
Agreed. Interesting to see the HN echo chamber of downvotes in full force on this subject of what is efficient modern technology. AC is civilised and a huge quality of life improvement, I won't be uncomfortable and miserable in summer if I can afford not to be.
Anything except using AC like the rest of the world, hey Monocle? There is no comparison, and not to mention the excellent efficiency of R-32 based super inverter systems that are no different to winter heating heat pumps. AC should be the norm in Europe, but apparently it's "far right"!
> Modern air conditioning isn’t the only way to keep cool in the summer
TFA is unobjectionable, but you've taken it as an attack on your identity as an enjoyer of AC. Nobody here is stopping you. Nobody here has called you far-right - you have Streisanded yourself.
HN tries to be better than this, which takes real effort from all of us - including me, including you - to rise above our atavistic identity crises. Bearing up a straw man is unedifying, please don't.
Bizarre hate towards someone's little blog. And it's not even LLM spam, just someone running their own WP site. By your logic I should save myself the Wikipedia verbosity and just ingest LLM output for any query I have forever.
Meta comment: nice to see someone NOT putting their FOSS project on Microslop (GitHub) and using another platform for hosting their code. I respect that, thank you for standing up to GitHub's dominance. I wish more projects didn't give GitHub such monopoly power by defaulting to using it.
Meta comment to your meta comment : this is a very personal opinion but I cannot stop myself from thinking less about your message (even though I agree with it), just because of that edgy wannabe way to go about naming Microsoft. You want to say Microsoft say that, you want to say Github say that but if you say a vaguely insulting name only to have to specify what you actually mean... It doesn't bring anything to the conversation, except lower the level, and if a company has flaws as big as Microsoft you don't need to resort to childish name calling to expose them. This is my personal opinion.
> just because of that edgy wannabe way to go about naming Microsoft.
I think it stopped being edgy and transitioned to a symbol of user frustration the moment their CEO tried to address the slop without acknowledging their customer pain.
It is not much different from the micro$oft used here often.
Imagine how refreshing if the press release simply said:
"We over-hired, we're ram-packed full of managers pinging each other on Slack all day and need to cut costs to sustain our operation. We think GitHub's shit and we want to be a nimble org with a fighting chance at eating their lunch. We're also gonna provide 1000 free runner hours/mo to open source projects that move from GitHub to gitlab, and we're gonna make project namespaces on gitlab.com a first class thing like GitHub did"
reply