Squashing

The s “squash” command is where we see the true utility of rebase. Squash allows you to specify which commits you want to merge into the previous commits. This is what enables a “clean history.” During rebase playback, Git will execute the specified rebase command for each commit. In the case of squash commits, Git will open your configured text editor and prompt to combine the specified commit messages. This entire process can be visualized as follows:

Note that the commits modified with a rebase command have a different ID than either of the original commits. Commits marked with pick will have a new ID if the previous commits have been rewritten.

https://www.atlassian.com/git/tutorials/rewriting-history

You can also amend for a softer approach, which works better if you don’t push to remote after every commit.

The git commit --amend command is a convenient way to modify the most recent commit. It lets you combine staged changes with the previous commit instead of creating an entirely new commit. It can also be used to simply edit the previous commit message without changing its snapshot. But, amending does not just alter the most recent commit, it replaces it entirely, meaning the amended commit will be a new entity with its own ref. To Git, it will look like a brand new commit, which is visualized with an asterisk (*) in the diagram below.

You can keep amending commits and creating more chunky and meaningful ones in an incremental way. Think of it as converting baby steps into an adult step.

Who would use that kind of type coercion? Who? I want to see his face.

fuck cars

Don’t trust vegetarians

check the authors’ browser history

nuclear clowns are the least funny

I recommend https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lebensraum

simulAIcrum

Keep repeating it and you ensure that self-fulfilling prophecy feedback loop.

And it’s good.

Hey, I have re read your comment a few times. Important info, but unsure how it relates to my comment. Rich people don’t contribute that much to C02?

There are 2 necessary changes as layers in this context:

1. There are also studies that show the GHGs for “rich people’s investments”. This is important because they are in the way of necessary adaptation and mitigation. We can’t do anything meaningful about climate and biosphere because that would require ending profiteering from planetary destruction, it would require decommodification.

2. Rich people’s consumption is excessive for anything. Not just their carbon footprint, but their ecological footprint. But they are a small minority, especially the richest. Being a small minority means that if they lose their… wealth and become wage workers, that’s going mean only a decrease of 15% GHGs. This 15% is not meaningful to avert ruining the planet’s surface. We need more than 100% (zero emissions and then removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere). This means that EVERYONE has to participate, which also means that we need cooperation. And you don’t have cooperation in a capitalist class society with all this “rat race” going on, you can’t, we’re literally all enemies (competitors) in this game.

So they can tell me how to live my life?

That’s one side of it, yes. To have any meaningful action, all sides of economic activity have to change, we need decreases in production (supply), but also in demand (consumption). If only production decreases, the demand side goes nuts and there’s hyperinflation and other problems. If only demand decreases (unlikely), the production side, which is owned by rich people, may decide to force and coerce an increase in demand somehow, as has been happening at least since the end of WW2.

Here, a game: https://play.half.earth/

While that needs to stop entirely, the 1%’ carbon footprint (yes, it applies to them too, this is what everyone here is actually pointing out) sums up to about 15% of global GHG emissions at the consumption level. Huge, but they are few, they aren’t “masses”.

We need GHG emissions to drop at least 100% (to 0%) and then we need to remove carbon (so that’s negative emissions) to get closer to the safer atmospheric CO2.

If you know any history involving US activity across the planet, you’d know that being a genocide embracing war criminal comes with being a US president, it’s part of the job.

my favorite order is:

Climate Safe Pensions - Stand.earth

Climate Safe Pensions

With more than $46 Trillion in assets worldwide, pension funds are one of the largest institutional investors in fossil fuels.

Given the growing financial risk facing fossil fuel companies, it is no longer a responsible investment to put our hard earned pension dollars into an industry that is wreaking havoc on our planet and frontline communities. Nearly 30% of fossil fuel industry shares are held by pension funds – with as much financial power as pension funds hold, they could be a force to reckon with in the battle to address the climate crisis.

The trash bit is better solved by not buying stuff in the first place (reduce).

Personal emissions exist, but are small. They add up when multiplied by millions or billions.

“I hate taking the stairs 4 floors down. I guess I could try jumping down from a window!”

lol, pizza economics sounds much better than doughnut economics