I've heard it said that English tends to reify language; that it tends to turn every-thing into a "thing". So no-thing still gets processed as a thing, in English. I'd be curious how "nothing" and "zero" are processed in other languages/cultures and if the experience/phenomenology changes. E.g., if 0 is recorded state of a place-value on an abacus, that's got a very different feel than 0 as a count term. And the 0th position in an array has a very distinct feeling as a location, and say the transition from an empty basket to a basket with one apple, has it's own *feel. Emptiness is a state of being, not a "thing". Not every-thing is a thing, but English makes it seem so. Maybe all languages make it so seem (And maybe German too, [c.f., Heidegger: the nothing noths])?
I'm not a fan of Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. People extend the language to fit their needs, not other way around. "Turning everything into a thing" is probably the inevitable way to accommodate philosophical thinking. Not everything is a thing, but to be able to make anything into an object of consideration and communication you need a word for it and a word is a thing.
...and treating a term for a state of being as if the state we an object, a thing, vs the state a thing is in, is a category mistake (and perhaps one that only happens with overthinking)--like what I might be doing right now? is what I'm doing right now a "thing"? No, right? Because, verbs aren't nouns. Are the states of things things? Are adjectives nouns? Are verbs nouns?
(no, but since in English I can verb my adjectived nouns into all sorts of noun-y verb craziness, nothing can get nouned and verbed out of adjectiving all day long, because English.)
Free upgrades are problematic themselves: once you've saturated your market (a good place to be, right?) you no longer have income to provide upgrades.
"First, cgroups emerged as the de facto way to control and monitor resources on a Linux machine. atop still lacks support for this fundamental building block. Second, atop stores data on disk with custom delta compression. This works fine under normal circumstances, but under heavy resource pressure the host is likely to lose data points. Since delta compression is in use, huge swaths of data can be lost for periods of time where the data is most important. Third, the user experience has a steep learning curve. We frequently heard from atop power users that they love the dense layout and numerous keybindings. However, this is a double-edged sword. When someone new to atop wants to debug a production issue, they’re solving two problems at once now: the issue at hand and how to use atop."
Yes, I read that. That’s an advantage of this tool against atop, not a disadvantage.
(“Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.”)
(If you’ve downvoted my comment, I’d love to hear why. I think my question is an entirely reasonable one; every tool has strengths and weaknesses. From the article, I know when I might want to use below; it sounds very useful. I think it would be very useful as well to know should I avoid it in any cases.)
