You realise this idea exists independently of decent hygiene, right?
Using Sync. Not seen a single ad so far.
I'll probably pay for it at some point when I have the spare cash, to support a dedicated developer.
Sync is also being actively developed. It's getting updated far faster and is far more feature rich than most Lemmy apps I've tried so far.
Yes.
You'd think so, wouldn't you?
Yes, it is condescending as you belittle the 'brain' role for the aforementioned jobs in retail, hospitality, healthcare, etcetera.
See, I don't disagree with that - because that shifts the statement to be 'encoder and decoder share responsibility for intention and perception' - which is more reasonable, but does not marry up with your original statement of intention all the way.
It doesn't, it's just a commentary on intention not being worth anything without a good result.
Ah yes. That frequently expressed emotion.
I agree that the goal would be for perception to match intent. But the acknowledgement that in order to do so we must iterate on a poor first communication highlights the fact that the perception is the important aspect as intent is static and unchanged by further iteration.
If perception wasn't at least as important as intent, then you could make a well intentioned communication and not worry if it was received correctly.
I did write some more but managed to fat-finger delete it and now I can't remember what I was trying to say. I'm hoping my point has still come across clearly? Sorry!