521–530 of 575 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or, you know, I’ll never touch Vue.js again?
Charitably, it creates a new friction for Russian business in deploying open-source software. That drag further diminishes Russia’s economy, and thus, its warmaking ability.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Pushing political commit messages is not "power". I'm not debating whether it works or whether it's the right form of activism. I'm responding to your comment. Namely you saying that taking a side is childish. > If you like like everyone around you you are not a rebel, just a conformist. If your goal is to follow the herd, that's bad. If it's to go in the opposite direction, that's the same thing. I'd encourage a p…
> Are you disputing the recent Russia's invasion of Ukraine? Not the GP. I don't specifically dispute that. But in a time when many fictional stories can be told through video, I think it's reasonable to be unsure and neutral on things that we don't have direct knowledge about. Put another way, I think being neutral and silent by default is a necessary defense against manipulation.
I can sympathize with the sense of confusion, but this is one of the principal purposes of information warfare. When successful it does one of following things:
1. disengages people who would otherwise be opposed;
2. sows doubt and division;
3. makes people believe the propaganda is true.
We often fixate on #3, but #1 and #2 are the principal goals of today's information warfare, because they're much easier to achieve. When the other side's population doesn't know what to think, you're in a great position. It's effectively demobilizing the enemy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> How about not taking sides instead of acting like a kid If you have the power to do something and you don't, that's taking a side. You either oppose something or you enable it. At least own that. If you're saying you're neutral, you either agree with the unpopular side and are scared to admit it, or you can't form an opinion because you're uninformed and thus uncivil, or you feel unaffected by what's happening and…
> If you have the power to do something and you don't, that's taking a side. You either oppose something or you enable it. At least own that. If you're saying you're neutral, you either agree with the unpopular side and are scared to admit it, or you can't form an opinion because you're uninformed and thus uncivil, or you feel unaffected by what's happening and thus discompassionate. Either way, that's pretty much th…
I say that Ukraine has the right to sovereignty and I condemn Russia's assault on that right and on its people. It goes against what I want from the society I live in. There is no nuance there.
We could talk about war crimes that are seemingly being committed in droves by the Russian side. We might find nuances there. But, there's no nuance about the crime of starting the invasion in the first place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm in Europe and I'd happily wear a jacket and a winter cap indoors. And people could go by bus, subway, ride share, so less oil and gas needed for transportation. And energy intensive industries could close for a while. Is it really more important to continue producing more cars, for example, than to try to stop the war?
> I'm in Europe and I'd happily wear a jacket and a winter cap indoors. That's the theory. Here is probably what would happen in practice: all the people that have disposable income will swallow the cost. All the people who can't swallow the cost will pour in their last savings for a few more hours of warmth. Those who can't will start rioting, especially when their children start coughing. It's hard to tell your chi…
> people who can't swallow the cost will pour in their last savings for a few more hours of warmth
Where I live, people aren't that short sighted. They bought all the toilet paper, planning months ahead.
> Those who can't will start rioting,
Eh, no. Not when they know the higher prices are for saving people in Ukraine.
But if they didn't know why, then, yes maybe.
> It's hard to tell your child "put on a jacket, dad can't pay to keep you warm" when little Jimmy next door goes to a Safari
It's easy. The parents tell the kids: "we're doing this, to save the lives of people in Ukraine, who are hiding in basements without food and water. This is how we build a society -- taking care of each other and others, as best we can."
If the politicians make it clear that it's for stopping the war, then, there'd be some social pressure for saving energy.
> > could go by bus, subway, ride share, so less oil and gas needed for transportation.
> In practice, many people just can't do that.
Seems I wasn't detailed enough.
There would be subsidies for people on the countryside, who needed their cars (no buses or subways nearby). And for farmers and public transport, and other for society important things, like, like you mentioned, electricians. And ambulances, plumbers, some others.
But most people aren't farmers or electricians.
> Many low earning workers will have to make a choice between going to work, and going to unemployment.
I wonder where you live. If it's in the US? In Europe, there are more buses and subways, and fewer people have cars.
> would just increase the disparity between the upper and lower class
Yes a bit. You could say that about the covid restrictions as well -- hit poor restaurant workers.
Seems like insignificant, a luxury problem, __compared to__ tens of thousands dying in the war.
100%. I've already seen articles in non-tech media that explain what happened to a non-technical audience, and the explanation sounded a lot like open source is the problem and that proprietary software would never have these problems. It wasn't that long ago that using open source software required a lot of politicking inside my clients, and we could easily go back there with enough spooked executives.
a disagreeable take: why should open source projects make any effort to be accessible to corporations that will never donate or support them?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> is more of a dog whistle ingratiating yourself with a certain crowd Genius move. Any concept that can be used to criticize you is implicitly outing me as part of your out-group. Now you can judge me not on my own merits, but on the merits of people you associate me with. And my posts can well-formulated and thought-out, you disregard them for factors i cannot possibly control. This is the partisan thinking that i d…
Seems you're doing the same thing, when you claim that others who try to do sth about something are just virtue signaling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is you public signaling that youre cancelling virtue signalers virtue signaling? "This is virtue signaling" is more of a dog whistle ingratiating yourself with a certain crowd instead of an argument. Don't know what youre trying to achieve besides that.
> is more of a dog whistle ingratiating yourself with a certain crowd Genius move. Any concept that can be used to criticize you is implicitly outing me as part of your out-group. Now you can judge me not on my own merits, but on the merits of people you associate me with. And my posts can well-formulated and thought-out, you disregard them for factors i cannot possibly control. This is the partisan thinking that i d…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> is more of a dog whistle ingratiating yourself with a certain crowd Genius move. Any concept that can be used to criticize you is implicitly outing me as part of your out-group. Now you can judge me not on my own merits, but on the merits of people you associate me with. And my posts can well-formulated and thought-out, you disregard them for factors i cannot possibly control. This is the partisan thinking that i d…
You just said "I'm cancelling virtue signalers", you didn't make any arguments I could judge based on their merit. Ergo, you're just whistling for your crowd to cheer you on. Pure virtue signaling.
Judge me by my own merits, not by some other random people you picked.
Edit: After showing this to her, my wife straight out told me that you are psychotic ("einen an der Dattel haben") and that I should not argue with random internet people. Thinking about it, she is right.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm in Europe and I'd happily wear a jacket and a winter cap indoors. That's the theory. Here is probably what would happen in practice: all the people that have disposable income will swallow the cost. All the people who can't swallow the cost will pour in their last savings for a few more hours of warmth. Those who can't will start rioting, especially when their children start coughing. It's hard to tell your chi…
Thanks for the reply -- seems there's some misunderstandings. Details below. > people who can't swallow the cost will pour in their last savings for a few more hours of warmth Where I live, people aren't that short sighted. They bought all the toilet paper, planning months ahead. > Those who can't will start rioting, Eh, no. Not when they know the higher prices are for saving people in Ukraine. But if they didn't kno…
1. While I acknowledge that people you talk about exist, I suspect that they're predominantly middle class, not the poor (ie. "people who can't swallow the cost"). If you don't have a baseline amount of wealth, then it's hard to have a car to go to costco to buy those 48 packs of toilet paper, and if your home is a shoebox 1bd apartment, you'll have a hard time finding place to store all the stuff you bought in advance.
2. there's only so much you can do "planning months ahead". You can hoard toilet paper but not gas.
>Eh, no. Not when they know the higher prices are for saving people in Ukraine.
>But if they didn't know why, then, yes maybe.
see my other comment on revealed preferences vs stated preferences https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30794396
>If the politicians make it clear that it's for stopping the war, then, there'd be some social pressure for saving energy.
Why's that not happening right now?
>I wonder where you live. If it's in the US? In Europe, there are more buses and subways, and fewer people have cars.
Doesn't that argument work in the opposite direction? ie. "there are more buses and subways, and fewer people have cars", so people are already taking public transit. From there, it's pretty hard to reduce fuel consumption even further as the people who are driving probably really need it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I certainly hope people don't just load this random website's script directly from their website frontend. That seem super insecure. If people want to use that popup they should download the code, give it a quick review, then host it themselves. This also solves the issue with that domain getting blocked.
> That seem super insecure. If people want to use that popup they should download the code, give it a quick review, then host it themselves. If the node devs did the same thing, this whole story would have been a nonstarter. I don’t recall if you suggested for node devs to also do this. Ironically, if the dev who made the hard drive wiping changes had said that it was a protest against the bad practices of the node e…
The problem with loading frontend libraries directly from third parties is that they can change that code at anytime and for arbitrary subsets of users.