They’re a European settler colonial project. I’m surprised Canada isn’t part of Eurovision.

How did we get rid of the hole in the ozone layer? Did we all individually cut down on our individual halocarbon usage, saw the hole shrink, and all held hands and sang kumbaya? No, we listened to scientists, and we took action on a government regulation level, and we solved it. Now compare that to oil companies wrecking the planet. We went the individualist route there, and it’s done nothing to solve the problem. You’re even admitting yourself that your individualist fairy tale nonsense is a distraction! “We can have a whole other discussion about raising minimum wage” (emphasis mine).

Generally the slightly more expensive shit is cheaper in the long run that’s the thing

I hear what you’re saying, I really am, but please be aware that you’re coming from a place of privilege, and that this kind of line hits just as tone deaf as telling a single mother working three jobs to feed her kids that “gee don’t you know it’s better to have a varied home cooked diet than microwave Mac and cheese?” Ultimately you’re putting the blame on the communities themselves with this kind of argument, which plays exactly into the personal responsibility myth that places like Dollar Tree and Shell live on. You’re distracting from actual solutions by doing this. It does the same as what carbon footprint and recycling do for oil companies, which is distract from real solutions.

Telling people to buy more expensive shit would work if there weren’t gigantic swathes of the population who literally cannot . They can’t do this. It is not possible. And then there’s the part of the population that won’t. It is not a solution. And Shell and Dollar tree understand this, and they welcome your free propaganda to distract from raising the minimum wage, corporate taxes, and enshrining workers rights. You’re damaging the cause. You truly are.

There are no individualist solutions to systemic problems. Voting with your wallet is a lie, and ethical consumerism is a joke. You cannot fault someone who lives paycheck to paycheck, or people saving up for their kids’ college education, or paying down their chemo debt, for buying at the cheaper store, which Dollar Tree typically is, compared to local operations. The only solution here is strict government imposed regulation, and going “no u” at consumers is counterproductive as it only serves as a distraction from the real problem.

In theory, yes. But unintentional bugs and security flaws exist (cf sites like have I been pwned), and by storing old passwords next to new ones increases the impact of such bugs and flaws significantly, precisely because folks use the same password for different services. Of course people shouldn’t do that, but they do, and as a dev you should be mindful of that.

I’m struggling to figure out what the problem is, aside from UX annoyance (like the IDE panicking before you close a brace or sth). Eventually whatever you end up typing is being sent to the server anyway, and if that’s not inherently problematic, what’s the problem with intermediates being sent? Is the problem XHR requests on events other than clicking? Why?

Given the fact that the strongest economic power in the world has been fucking with them for decades, and they still manage to keep up on things like life expectancy and education (at times even surpassing the US on the life expectancy), I’d say they’re doing pretty well. And looking at neighboring countries with similar histories that aren’t getting fucked by the US, but chose capitalism (or had it chosen for them in case of countries like Chile), I’d say Cuba’s a pretty good argument in favor of socialism.

..... for zsh users

I’m kind of surprised at the number of people taking this post seriously.

I don’t know if it applies to people with adhd, but there is this theory that people with autism have weak central coherence. That is, they have a tough time dealing with broad strokes and assembling context into a comprehensive picture of reality. This manifests in simple things like preferring instructions like “buy one dozen eggs” over “buy some eggs”, to more complicated things like understanding that someone is joking when there’s a thunderstorm out and they say “nice weather”. Oftentimes, people with autism are very detail oriented, and uncomfortable with missing puzzle pieces.

For me, this reveals itself very similarly to what you describe. If I want to center a div, there’s a good chance I’ll be looking up how css works, then at the eBNF form of css, and then probably the Chomsky hierarchy, and then probably set theory bc the formal language theory book I picked up uses it, at which point I’ll probably be lead to learn about Russel’s paradox and so on. It’s debilitating.

I don’t know if you’re autistic (although there is like a 60% comorbidity with adhd), but I do know that folks with autism experience the same thing. I don’t have a solution for you, but you could potentially find tips on dealing with this on forums for autistic people.

Ah yes, using white as a noun, the hallmark of a sane and reasonable person.

That is absolutely crazy. Thanks for sharing!

I know they do a lot of killing and they fuck up the local ecosystem, but I never knew they actually made extinctions happen. What species?

I need it, desperately. My gf knows this, pays me compliments, and every single one is a core memory for me. Also working out and getting a bit swole means you get a lot of compliments from the boys, which is also nice.

Claiming that the genocide, apartheid, and colonialism perpetrated by Israel is in any way complex or nuanced is such a disgustingly smug way of revealing you haven’t spent even a moment thinking the situation through, or reading up on the history. Gross.

It’s right there, you’re replying to the nuance, you dingus. He’s literally adding nuance and you reply “oh well I guess there’s no nuance then!” How stupid are you?

No

They ship with Linux?

I think In all honesty that we have different notions of what the word leftist means, and I’m not super keen on a discussion on semantics. Personally, I attach a very specific fixed non-relative set of ideals and principles to the word “leftist” (an acknowledgement that capitalism is neither fair nor efficient, a focus on building a state for the proletariat, cooperation over imperialism, etc etc). From your comment I get the sense that you have a more relativist approach. Whether or not someone is a leftist depends (additionally) on the political context in which they operate. In this light, you call Biden, a staunch neoliberal capitalist, a (lesser) leftist in the same breath as calling Belgian Marxists leftists. I am in no position of telling you that you’re using words wrong any more than you are in the position of telling me I’m using words wrong.

But there are some things you mentioned that I do think are worth discussing, under the assumption that we would both label the mainstream part of the democratic party as liberals. Because they do not support the policies you would label as socially leftist. The last time universal health care was part of a mainstream candidate’s campaign was Obama’s first campaign (17 years ago), and what we ended up with was essentially a handout to insurance companies, a very far cry from UH. No major mainstream candidate since even mentions it.

Then there’s the support for LGBTQ rights. I would like to focus on the T part first. Not only was there no countermessaging from the democrats to Trump’s virulent anti-trans rhetoric; after the race was lost, the MSNBC talking heads and major democrat campaign strategists were on national television claiming that part of the reason Harris lost was that she wasn’t tough enough on trans people. The transgender support by democrats is skin deep, and ready to be dropped when it becomes politically inconvenient. If the transgender folks are that easy to drop, don’t doubt the other letters won’t drop either. To finish off this section I’ll leave you with a nice Biden quote from 2006: “marriage is between a man and a woman and states must respect that”

Another policy you mention is environmentalism. I won’t be verbose. Big part of Harris’ campaign was that she was more pro-fracking than Trump.

Next women’s rights. Four years of Biden, nothing done to fix Roe v Wade. All these words about supporting women’s rights and here we still are with 12 year olds carrying their rapist’s babies to term. Actually, we don’t even get words, there’s a nice website which kept track of whether the Biden admin used the term ‘abortion’ in a press release (they did, once, more than a year in).

I’m going to take some liberty into what else you might consider socially leftist positions, namely a pro-immigration stance, and an anti-war stance.

War first. You can go back to the Senate and congress voting records. Democrats consistently vote in favor of bombing the middle east. The Biden administration pumped billions into the Palestinian genocide. During the Harris campaign, Waltz said that the expansion of Israel was crucial to the success of America. During the recent Signal gaffe from the Trump administration where a group chat leaked where they were planning to bomb Yemeni schools and hospitals, democrats were outraged not by the fact that the US would be bombing civilians, but rather about the fact that it leaked.

Immigration next. The kids in cages at the border that we were all (rightly) upset about during the Trump admin? Not only did the Biden admin do nothing whatsoever about this, the number actually increased during his presidency. The messaging from the conservatives is simple: the immigrants come in, they’re criminals, they take our jobs, and we need to do something about this. This is of course false, if you look at the actual statistics, undocumented immigrants commit fewer crimes per capita than citizens, and the addition of immigrants to the workforce (and to the market as consumers) is actually a boon to the economy. Did the Harris campaign do any countermessaging on this, citing the statistics, and looking at reality? No. A big part of her campaign is that her border policies would be tough, and that she was tough on crime.

I’ve taken the US as an example, but the same pattern applies in Europe, at least in the countries I’m most familiar with (Germany and the Netherlands).

Finally, you mention that the extreme right wing is similar to the extreme left wing in Belgium, and that conservatives are left wing on an economic level. I can’t speak much for Belgian politics. I went to the Wikipedia pages of the leftmost and rightmost parties I’m aware of (PvdA and Vlaams Belang) and all I can say is that I don’t see it. I see stark differences on policies on a social level (one being incredibly pro multi-cultural) and on an economic level (one being very pro union and worker, and the other somewhere between neoliberal and protectionist). But again I know very little of Belgian politics.

But I can say something about the conservatives portraying themselves as socialists. Please do not fall for it. This is a trick as old as Hitler. They put the “Socialist” in nazi only to trick workers into voting for them. They ended up privatizing more than any government before them (something I hope we can agree on isn’t very leftist), slashed minimum wage, culled unions, and put socialists in concentration camps. Not very left wing. Same with the current far right in power in the Netherlands. Portrayed (successfully) as economically leftist during the campaign, but every policy they’ve put in place is economically right wing. They tried putting a flat tax (unsuccessfully so), they’ve gutted public services, and they increased income tax while leaving corporate taxes fixed. They do this every time, do not fall for it.

It’s not leftist infighting if one side isn’t leftist.