Elixir? Is that the weird older cousin of Gleam?

mfw non-commutativeness

I uninstalled one drive immediately, it’s so annoying. It’s also really fucky with when it updates files. If I need to use it, I’ll go on my browser

Isn’t the context about the overthrow of the Russian Empire by communist revolutionaries? Not modern first-worlders? Am I missing something here? Why would “foreign imperialists” be relevant to modern first-worlders?

That being said, to actually answer your line of questioning, it is the correct solution to change society while ALSO overthrowing and locking up the oppressors. That may involve the elite dying, but those deaths are necessary. Peaceful reformism and strict nonviolence policies never works – unless you consider extremely high amounts of unnecessary suffering for innocents to achieve comparatively minor goals as “success” (cough cough Nelson Mandela). Even Gandhi and MLK (who took most of his influence from Gandhi), although nonviolence advocates, were well aware that violence is often necessary to achieve a better future, and much of the work they did was to the benefit of violent/militant revolutionaries (although of course they’re portrayed a lot more neutered/“deradicalized”, as well as the roles of complete compliance to nonviolence being completely overstated while violent methods are hidden away as if they didn’t exist, not even to be mentioned).

After capture though, death pentalty is not the way to go, but life imprisonment is fine and they may have a chance to be released later, mostly depending on their status/loyalty. I’m sure a lot of “revolutionaries” would disagree with me though, but I’m not an “eye for an eye” believer… I suppose if you’re in a situation where the former imperialist rulers would likely have power to directly cause damage while detained or incarcerated, or they’re likely to escape or be “rescued”, then it would be justified to chop off their heads or put a bullet in their cranium.

The core issue is that these people (the oppressors/ruling class) can not be rehabilitated, and are likely to stir up considerable trouble and disrupt when they have the opportunity, either in a bid to regain their power, or out of a large feeling of loss that makes them go nuts. You can’t always reasonably ensure that they won’t try to fuck shit up in the future.

That’s just my view, but of course there are people other than me who are just bloodthirsty for vengeance (my opinion is that they’re not thinking all too rationally and it’s the same mindset as parents that hit/yell at their kids, they’re convincing themselves it’s for the greater good but in reality it’s just attempting to satisfy their feelings of anger). Either way, I see their lives as considerably less valuable than the lives of the people they oppressed, not because they have an inherently evil soul or something, but because they are already too far gone and only can bring chaos to the world.

People with ADHD, Dyspraxia (a motor disability), and some type of insomnia disorder have significantly higher rates of car accidents – around 4x more likely for ADHD and 3x more likely for insomnia disorders (driving while sleepy is around as dangerous as driving while drunk). At minimum 25% of all car crashes involve people with ADHD or insomnia disorders (which is why your car insurance rates might skyrocket in some states if you get diagnosed)… I have all of those. Yet, somehow, they still allowed me to get my driver’s license, and I got it with single-digit hours of driving experience at the time… very American to give licenses that allow you to drive 13-ton vehicles to people who shouldn’t even qualify to drive on public roads.

I still have no reason to waste tens of thousands of dollars over the course of a few years on a car though.

C++ is inferior to Rust and should be used in no new projects unless it is absolutely necessary

Firefox consumes more RAM than chrome on average. Edge uses the least RAM

Also, Floorp is superior to regular Firefox

I’ll keep this short since you already seem extremely unhinged and half the stuff you wrote is basically empty insults.

You losers can’t even prop up Ukraine against Russia, and think you can take on China.

Remind me how long that “10-day special operation” is taking again? Seriously, how can the “2nd best military in the world” falter so hard against their tiny neighbour with 1/4 of the population just because they got weapon donations from other countries? It shouldn’t be that hard to counter right, I mean Russian military technology is allegedly so advanced and totally not stuck in the 80s. I would understand if it were half-way across the globe or something, but they’re LITERALLY ON THEIR DOORSTEP. It’s also concerning that China has repeatedly failed Russia when it comes to Ukraine and has caved into international pressure quite a few times, maybe it’s because China also realizes that the war is completely embarrassing Russia?

The sheer delusion here. Burgerland economy would collapse overnight. Go check where all your shit comes from sometime. 😂

The US navy has a larger airforce than the entire Chinese airforce, and the US has a larger and more advanced air fleet than the next 5 countries (Russia, China, India, SK, Japan) combined, and invests 3x as much as China into the military (and that’s what, 13% of the US’ budget?). The US navy also has over 2x the displacement of the Chinese navy. Spending is DEFINITELY not a problem considering that.

read and weep ignoramus https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4657439-china-doesnt-need-to-invade-to-achieve-taiwanese-unification/

Damn, an opinion piece news article. Guess that destroys the entire American military and truly shows that China numba one.

Latest polling shows that vast majority of people want to maintain the status quo, and very few people want independence, but do go on child https://esc.nccu.edu.tw/PageDoc/Detail?fid=7801&id=6963

I literally said that exact same thing in my original comment, it goes against your point lmao. The status quo is defacto independence and “Taiwan, not China”. Notice how unification is by far the least popular response in what you linked, and has decreased in popularity significantly over decades. And of course, gaining independence eventually has increased in popularity over multiple decades. Is this part of China’s grand plan, to make unification with them less popular over time?

What you’re doing here is called sophistry. Taiwan being part of China is a fact that’s recognized by international law.

Tell me you have no idea how the UN works without explicitly saying so. A majority of countries not recognizing Taiwan doesn’t mean it’s “international law” that Taiwan isn’t independent.

It’s really that simple. The reality is that China could remove US sponsored regime in the rogue province any time they want.

LMAO this is such a cope. Yeah I’m sure the extremely aggressive all-bark-no-bite and constant “you better not do <x diplomacy with Taiwan or military action in Taiwanese strait/South China Sea> again or we’ll do something about it, I swear!” empire is suuuper capable of taking Taiwan. They know if they tried full-out war against the US or its allies (Taiwan), the US navy would cut off their international trade and turn their country upside down – it’s why they’re trying so hard (and failing) to seize full control of the South China Sea.

However, they realize that it’s much better to remove burgerland influence in a peaceful way, and that’s what will happen.

Again, absolute cope. They’ve been at it for over 75 years and haven’t made any progress, considering Taiwanese have developed significantly more national identity and even more people in Taiwan support the country participating in international relations under the name “Taiwan” (80%) and consider themselves primarily Taiwanese (90%), and only 6% consider themselves more Chinese than Taiwanese (more people considered themselves primarily Chinese many decades ago but that has long since dwindled).

It’s incredible how people have trouble grasping such basic things.

It’s incredible how you have trouble grasping the situation and think China is going to “peacefully” absorb Taiwan when Taiwan is farther from China than ever in terms of national identity and international participation.

Several polls have indicated an increase in support of Taiwanese independence in the three decades after 1990. In a Taiwanese Public Opinion Foundation poll conducted in June 2020, 54% of respondents supported de jure independence for Taiwan, 23.4% preferred maintaining the status quo, 12.5% favored unification with China, and 10% did not hold any particular view on the matter. This represented the highest level of support for Taiwanese independence since the survey was first conducted in 1991. A later TPOF poll in 2022 showed similar results.

I’ll say it again: Why would countries risk ruining trade relations with China, one of the three most important trade powers internationally, over unnecessarily pointing out reality and thus contradicting China? And how can you seriously say territory a country doesn’t control in any capacity at all theirs? Why do you think a majority of world powers are independently trading with Taiwan if Taiwan isn’t independent from China?

Don’t you think China would, you know, not be constantly complaining about not having control over Taiwan for the past few decades and making bluffs about invading if Taiwan were already part of China? That’s a pretty obvious sign that “no, China doesn’t own Taiwan in any capacity”.

The US state department doesn’t decide which countries own or control which territory, now does it? How exactly can you say territory you don’t control (neither legally nor militarily) and likely will never control is part of your own country? Furthermore, why would the US risk ruining trade relations with China over unnecessarily pointing out reality, when it doesn’t benefit the US to recognize Taiwanese independence?

I can’t imagine most Nvidia employees don’t make enough to become millionaires within like 5-10 years if they aren’t already. Their entry-level software engineering positions have a base pay of $147K and total compensation of $180K. The lowest paying level of senior engineers gets more like $300K… Even the ones who leave before then are highly likely to get a job with comparable pay or benefits considering they have Nvidia on their resumé.

Now, tens-of-millions-aires, I don’t think most employees get there.

Please never imply temptation to go to Idaho again. I live in the deep south and even I’m afraid of that hellhole

I like polymorphism. Having to have a hundred differently named functions or structs or something that do the same thing but slightly differently in Rust is annoying as hell. Especially with all the underscores you have to type… If Rust were more functional though it’d make that problem go away pretty quickly.

Surely you must notice that “Modern American Liberalism” and “Liberalism” are two separate terms? “Liberal” can mean MANY things other than American liberalism. It even specifies in the article you’re quoting. You cannot just assume that any and every usage of the term “liberal” is in reference to social liberalism, even in America it’s still used in the common/typical/“original” sense frequently (just not by uninformed voters).

And AFAIK nobody said anything about liberalism (and American liberalism) and conservativism being equivalent either. “Conservative” is a significantly more broad term than “liberal” and it’s impossible to definitively equate or oppose them, but generally conservativism is opposite to progressivism – seeing how liberalism is usually socially progressive, it isn’t generally a perfect match. But there does exist “conservative liberalism”, which is socially conservative and economically liberal – in theory what American conservatives are supposed to be, but in reality they’re a bit more… fascist.

Relatively though, American liberals are significantly more conservative than, say, socialists and most leftist ideologies. They still hold many very (especially fiscally) conservative beliefs. There are plenty of American liberals that are in the pockets of big pharma.

Also calling modern American liberalism “socialism”, even “democratic socialism”, is laughable. Socialism requires abolishing capitalism and having the means of production belong to the workers/public. Democratic socialism is an ideology that believes that socialism can be achieved through peaceful democratic reform rather than violent revolution. Modern American liberalism specifically advocates for a mixed economy with mostly private, but some nationalized, industries, which is very much NOT socialist. It is quite literally, regulated capitalism. It also specifies that in the same article you quoted. You can’t just take any welfare state (or attempt at one) and call it socialism.

For the most part, “lib” is synonymous with “so-called market capitalist and liberty advocate”, i.e. almost all Americans in politics. A non-American using it to describe American politicians bought out by big pharma makes perfect sense, as most of them also claim to like the free market and (negative) freedom and stuff.

“Liberal” isn’t only a word used for modern US/Canadian progressives. “Liberal” is used to mean someone who believes in “free-market” capitalism, free trade, private ownership of the means of production and anti-nationalizationism, anti-protectionism/anti-regulationism, and individualism/anti-collectivism. It’s pretty much synonymous with right-wing “libertarian” ideologies, including neoliberalism, classical liberalism, and "anarcho"capitalism. This is what the word has always referred to normally, and is by far the most common usage in most of the world, and it’s still used this way in the US – mainly in economic, philisophical, or “fundamental rights” contexts though.

Liberalism is pretty much the antithesis of socialism, in a purely left-versus-right sense at least. The American ideology is often considered “social liberalism” or even “modern American liberalism”, which still holds beliefs of individualism and capitalism, but differs from liberalism in that it pushes for a regulated mixed economy, as well as the government contributing to fulfilling social needs like healthcare, education, and infrastructure. It also is defined by focusing on social justice/civil rights, as opposed to traditional liberalism (which is opposed to social justice and civil rights, believing people in a “free market” will decide to do the right thing). It ranges from being a centrist ideology to being a left-leaning right-wing ideology, so when the only opposition is basically dormant fascism, it is the “left” ideology. In a full political view though, it isn’t leftism.

The American misappropriation of the term came from a time when the word “progressive” was starting to be seen as “radical” (and therefore negative). Progressives started using “liberal” instead, and it became a way to say “I only want some government intervention in the economy and social issues, but not a radical amount”. When New Deal politicians like FDR popularized it, it kind of became cemented in American political discourse as meaning that.

in general, adjectives and verbs after nouns because it’s more organized/easier to search/filter. as god intended.

I know everyone hates HOAs because they’re usually petty and dumb, but this is where I think they’d actually be helpful. Designate certain neighborhoods as “quiet zones” where similarly obnoxious activities (that have reasonable, quiet alternatives) are banned: no motorized leaf blowers, lawn mowers, souped-up motorcycles or muscle cars.

Or… hear me out… we can have laws on emissions and noise pollution (which mostly already exist in cities) and cops/government officials that actually enforce them (and by “enforce” I don’t mean shoot somebody after arriving on-scene) instead of relying on a private entity to dictate what happens in your living space

No, it was imported from German. Frisian and Dutch have “lienwurd” and “leenwoord” too (also calqued from German)

No fair, this is uncalled for aggression towards Triangulum Galaxy dwellers!