It’s a bit of a paradox, because public unrest is a feature of democracy, not a bug. What autocrats fail to recognize is that the appearance of a peaceful society without conflict is not the same thing as a peaceful society without conflict. Public protest and unrest is a symptom, your society telling you something is wrong, not the thing that’s wrong.
Looking at their comments here, I don’t think OP is interested in playing by the community rules.
Propaganda is insidious.
Suggest reporting post for breaking community rules:
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda will be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating will be removed.
Well, yea, that’s the problem. I shouldn’t have to “learn” a UI, things should be apparent and obvious.
Counterpoint: vim is very well liked for it’s UI, but there’s a very steep learning curve.
To your point, though, the learning process ideally ought to be seamless and linear; each new thing you can do with the application should be mostly obvious given what you already know about the UI, not force you to learn everything from scratch or do work to learn it (unless you’re into that kind of thing). I don’t think Discord is the worst offender of this rule, but they could make it better.
You’re right: it’s probably not practical to paint a building with the stuff. Nighthawkinlight briefly comments on this. I believe the idea is to use it on passive radiator panels to sink heat from a pumped coolant fluid. That way you can strategically place panels (e.g. on the roof) and control them, just like solar heating panels.
Care to elaborate?
Ahh, okay, so nothing new under the sun: Hipsters hate normies and September never ended.
Although I’m under the impression that Mint and Pop have taken a bite out of the “beginner desktop” market, Ubuntu is most of what I observe in the office when everybody else is booting Windows.
I can understand selecting for novelty; I’m usually in that camp. But novelty shouldn’t come at the expense of an argument to IT departments that they should support at least one Linux distro.
For those of us still naive … Why does Lemmy say “Ubuntu bad” now?
Aye, didn’t want to accuse you of advocating for censorship. Just a friendly reminder that even the most “dangerous” texts are that way because of context, not content.
Also I was today years old when I learned about The Turner Diaries. Yikes.
I think it would depend on the books.
Isn’t that the whole argument for banning some books and not others?
I live in the USA. I’m talking about people in developed nations. The richness of a large region only loosely correlates to the prosperity of its smaller regions.
People have to make decisions based upon their environment. There’s no government in the world that can control this fact. The least we can do is acknowledge it and help people make the right decisions within their environment.
School attendance works all around the world.
For most kids in most places, I agree. But there are some places around the world where formal government-run school does not work. I live nearby some very rural places with chronically underfunded schools and unique social problems. The teachers I know who work there try their hardest, yet are aware they can’t do a good enough job for their kids. In those communities, formal schooling just isn’t enough.
Provide good options and people will make good decisions. Abolish bad options and people will still make bad decisions.
…everything else around me moves an hour. I have to move because time is standardized.
This sounds an awful lot like you’re arguing for continuing to change our clocks twice a year. I’ll assume benefit of the doubt that this is just a misunderstanding.
I don’t think standard matches our biology in some magical way.
It’s not magic. It’s science.
work doesn’t let you come in earlier and leave earlier in the winter (clock-wise)
And that’s where the real problem lies. Instead of negotiating with our employers to help build equitable schedules, we’d rather ask the government to enforce it for us. Permanent anything, either DST or ST, will force us to face this fact. In light of that, I’d rather go with permanent Standard Time, as it matches mean solar time and thus circadian rhythms. Everything else is a social contact.
why you’re snarkily editing my words
That’s fair. That’s on me.
earth time is arbitrarily assigned
Excuse me if I’m misunderstanding what you mean … but, no, it really isn’t. UTC is defined quite precisely and accurately to track the mean solar time. Time zones are usually designed to balance the zenith of the sun (that’s “noon”) and regional boundaries (although some countries make some… creative decisions in that regard). “Morning” and “evening” are defined in terms of the position of the sun, not some number on a clock.
Perhaps you think I work 9-5.
Apologies. I was using “9 to 5” to mean “a standard work schedule that doesn’t actually exist for most people except as a cliche.”
I have no desire to go to work an hour earlier
But that’s exactly what permanent DST is! Just because the clock still says “7 xDT” instead of “7 xST” doesn’t make it the same time. The sun still rises and sets on it’s own time no matter what our clocks say. Circadian rhythms ultimately depend on sunrise, zenith, and sunset, not some number on a clock. Switching between ST and DST effectively forces the whole world to adopt a “winter” schedule and a “summer” schedule, but in an incredibly disruptive and politically-charged way.
I agree that changing clocks twice a year is a bad idea. My point is, if we’re going to pick one, it should be the one that is based on the motion of the planet. The whole world has to coordinate schedules anyways. So let’s use a standard that more closely matches our biology, not some “you’ll save daylight” marketing.
Or maybe we should all agree to live in the future and just use UTC…
We’re kind of having the same argument in two different threads … I’m not sure which thread is better.
Morning our schedules is no better than moving out clocks.
It’s objectively better! “Moving clocks” is effectively the same as moving schedules for individuals, but to practically coordinate with others, everybody must change their clock and therefore their schedule. Individuals and organizations already construct their schedules as needed.
Part of the issue is that we all work too damn much, anyways. The 40 hour, 5 day work week (and thus the 9-to-5) is an arbitrary concept that research has indicated may be just as effective as a shorter work week.
I’m not arguing for changing clocks twice a year. I’m arguing that permanent DST is no better than permanent Standard Time when it comes to scheduling. The difference is that people are falsely convinced permanent DST will give them “more daylight” when it will not. Schedules have always shifted between seasons. We can’t do anything about the motion of planets, but we can decide to go to work an hour earlier to maximize how much continuous time we have after work to do yardwork or whatever.
Today, we have this arbitrary “9 to 5” work schedule. Give it 20 years of permanent DST, and we’ll start wishing we “had more daylight” because we have a “10 to 6” work schedule. They’re just numbers. Why not choose the simpler standard?
So you’d rather change everybody else’s schedule to meet your desires? Because that’s what DST is: the government telling its people to change their schedules by an hour.
As they say: Some people want to watch the world burn… Other people want to carry the torches.
I salute your bravery.