Explain how it is wrong and why it would be. If it is always wrong it follows it has to be wrong here too. The answer is that the meaning of "we all" is context dependent and that friend of yours that argues that we all somehow includes people in the whole city is an oddball that doesn't pick up the context within the words have been said.

We can all go around and make each others day worse with deliberate pedantry by ignoring the context of words, but that is basically just a waste of human energy. If you disagree with the fundamental point I made, argue against it based on the merits of the idea instead of arguing semantics.

But a specific type of person appears to labour under the illusion that somehow we can get by without we all collectively steering our direction and choosing people who do what needs to be done without commercial interest. Their idea is that instead of choosing people who do it, we just make them compete for who can squeeze the most profit out of dealing with a problem and "somehow" that leads to a better result. When you press them for the details on that part of the mechanism, you will usually get crickets.

The design coming out of a LLM may be okay if you have nothing to do with design and can't program CSS, I just see a deeply inconsistent mess.

I am convinced well designed software has to be thought out from the user perspective. And if I am the one to commandeer a LLM, designing myself is part of thinking about what I want.

The difference is how it was communicated. Most non-Tech/non-infrastructure-people got no clue about these things. If they know you're battling the demons of plumbing on their behalf they will thank you, if you're the weird guy that has smeared dirt in the face and is seen once a week while the plumbing fails ever so often, guess what.

That means even if the problems and their fixes remain the same, the communication around them really matters. Tech people can be extremely bad with this. And if we're talking IT it is really the plumbing that holds the company together.

"This is what my regular customers pay me. If I hired one of my friends or relatives I see it as my duty to pay them at least what they are worth, this is the way you raised me."

I believe this to be true btw. If someone is really your friend, you want them to do well and that means you pay what they usually get or you don't bother them and get someone else.

Yes. Many musicians want their stuff to sound like the music of their heroes they grew up with, and that music is often compressed to a block as well. So compression isn't just about making things sound louder, it also has its own aesthetical value. Whether that is good or bad aesthetics can be argued about, but some people also like to distort their instruments which was also a thing people frowned upon in the past.

> I’ve heard this is also why film and video game soundtracks are often very compressed, even when orchestral, because they have to fit in the background with dialog/sfx

The official themes often are quite compact, but there is often also highly dynamic orchestral work used that is way less recognizable and used with more dynamics (think about te soon creating orchestral atmospheres). Cinema mixes are a thing btw. where many consumers complain about too high dynamic ranges. They complain that the dialog is low and the explosion loud. Cinemas being among the few spaces we mixing engineers have where we have a bit more control over the presumed levels, especially if we are talking about Dolby certified venues.

This is a pain signal. Some IT dude saying things are crap in every meeting is not.

E.g. that time a central media controls power supply broke down which would have made using one of the most prestigious rooms impossible. I fixed it myself by swapping in a spare power supply from a used unit, then went on to remind them twice a year that we are now living on borrowed time and I take no responsibilities if a fault I predict to happen and get no funds to fix will in fact happen. 4 years later I got the funds.

Having stuff costs money. Everybody wants to invest funds once, but nobody wants to keep paying for maintenance.

1. Compressed sound can be an integral (wanted) part of different genre aesthetics. I personally love dynamic mixes, but if you let your customers A/B mixes they will often chose the more compressed/louder one. If your song sounds weak after another bands song, that is an issue.

2. For reasons of health/liability there are maximum levels on headphones and mobile playback devices. That means if my mix has a high dynamic range the bulk of it may really just be too low when played back on the majority of headphones. If I mix my own music this is a bargain I can make if I mix other peoples music I would try to be a little more on the cautious side if the musicians didn't demand a highly dynamic mix.

3. Compressed sound works better in noisy environments and as background music. 90% of people who listen to music do not listen to it actively, they just let it run in the background or are passively exposed to it. Try listening to a good dynamic recording of Beethovens fith in your car with the window rolled down. You will hear some strong phrases then inbetween nothing as it is below the ambient noise floor.

Vinyl has the benefit, that I as the mixing engineer can assume that the listener will be much more likely actively involved with the music than say in a radio mix.

Also: the meaning of the word semantic is that the used elements give you context about the contents. So if you place text in an