s73ver_

That's not a similar situation in the least. Comparing calling out and calling for the removal of bad cops to holding the thin blue line ignores any bit of context there is.

"I'd love to learn other languages and stacks! It's just that, often, it isn't a worthy use of my time. All that time used into learning C++ and Qt would be better used in making and improving my software."

This line of thinking, that it's not worth your time to learn tools that would improve your software, and make it less resource intensive, is a large reason for that trope.

"Many are using web tecnologies because of the fads, and some out of lazyness, but many (i'd guess most) are doing it because it's worth it."

I can't agree with this, mainly because, it's not worth it. It doesn't improve the software in any way; if anything, it makes it worse.

"For the last time, "existing design guidelines and patterns" is a myth."

No, they aren't.

"MacOS UI consistency is a mess."

Not really. Most small developer programs I use follow these. It makes it really easy to know what to do to accomplish something.

"Furthermore, most people do not care about this"

[Citation Needed]. I think most people would prefer to not have to learn a new UI from scratch everytime they want to use a different app.

"and the value of marketing with a sleek design vastly outweighs any benefit of conforming to system components UI."

What is this "value"? How does that help me accomplish my tasks?

"If literally every Electron app fixed memory issues and correctly placed OK/Cancel dialog buttons, I'd be fine with it for the rest of my life"

You mean, if every Electron app stopped being Electron?

As long as they are not calling out the cops doing wrong, there are no good cops.

I want both, and it's quite possible to have both.

No, please do. Explain to users why you need that, and why you feel you are important enough to bypass and ignore all of the existing design guidelines and patterns of whatever OS I'm running on. And why you feel you have to use up all of my CPU and memory to do so.

See, for a website, that's fine. But not for an application. Why would I not want an application that fits in well with my chosen OS, and follows the design guidelines and patterns of that OS?

I wish them the best of luck, but I don't think it's going to happen, because one of the big reasons Electron is popular is because web-dev people don't want to learn other languages.

Are you going to start lobby to make it illegal for companies to put anti-class action clauses in their ToS? Are you going to lobby to make it illegal for a company to force mandatory binding arbitration on their customers? If not, then you're just trying to have your cake and eat it too. You're trying to keep the government from punishing wrongdoing, and trying to keep people from the very few remedies they have.

Because there need to be national standards for education. The citizens of a state do not exist in a vacuum, and being taught Creationism instead of actual science is going to do great harm to those kids ability to get jobs, which is going to have an impact on many sectors of the economy.

Eh, I feel one can be just as angry/outraged at Trump & Team as they can be at Congress for letting them get away with it.

That, and given the upcoming midterm elections, I feel I have more influence on Congress (or at least my Congressional delegation) than I do on Trump & Friends.

I don't buy that, mainly because that only works if I can afford to sue those doing wrong. Most people cannot. Hence, why the government is there: to uphold these laws, and use everyone's collective resources to do that.

To be quite frank, any amount of marketing is over marketing for this. I shouldn't have to pay a single cent to have that kind of monitoring; it is my data that they are using. I should be able to look at and correct the data at any time, with no cost whatsoever.

Most things already are. But there are many things that do need to be a federal concern, because a state does not exist in a vacuum, nor is it a (metaphorical) island. Things like the environment and pollution, for instance, need to have a federal component. One state may decide to relax environmental protections so that they can encourage factories and jobs. However, that pollution does not limit itself to the people that decided it. People outside that area, in other states that do have environmental regulations, will also be affected.

The Congress has the Constitutional Responsibility to act as a check on the Executive Branch, through several means, up to and including impeachment of the Executive. Trump has done several things this past year alone that would have led to censure or impeachment had they been done by past Presidents. If Congress refuses to fulfill its duty, then they deserve the anger they are receiving.

So how would less regulation around data security (which is the thing that this is about) prevent another Equifax? Remember, you and I are not Equifax's customers, so we have no ability to choose anything in this scenario.

You're trying to equivocate basic human rights with being able to dump pollution in the water supply.

In that situation, the only funds for those agencies would come from fines. We're not at that situation.

And I'm all in favor of the CFPB getting pretty heavy handed. I wanna see some Enron style prosecutions start.

Having children rarely contributes positively to the "accumulate wealth" goal.

Unfortunately, most of those committees don't have any actual power to enact anything. By resigning in protest, they at least prevent themselves from being used as justification to enact the things that the Trump admin is doing.

That doesn't sound like an analogous situation, though.

At the same time, we'd also be proponents of shutting down the connection of someone infected with a virus that is flooding the network with traffic. This would fall under the same thing, if the banks are running into a lot of problems with CC transactions to buy crypto.

Also, what the IRS says about cryptocurrency for tax purposes has no bearing on the discussion at hand.

Yeah, no. Again, you're arguing for the "freedom" to scam people. Not gonna happen.

And you don't live in isolation; you are not an island. Those people that get scammed? They're not going to do so in isolation. That's going to have a ripple effect on the rest of society.

It's only a win if they don't get laid off or have their paychecks cut.

And I'm pretty sure that the people who do it for their job, if they aren't able to find another one, would miss it.

Automation can be good, but we can't forget that these are actual people, with rent payments, food bills, and possibly families, that are currently doing these jobs. Blindly following the "Automation is great" mantra, while forgetting about them, is going to be disastrous.

Why do you feel these workers are not entitled to basic human dignity and respect? Why is it that any time the workers try to get some piece of the massive prosperity that they've contributed to building, they get threatened with automation? Why should they not share in the rewards for the company they helped to make prosperous?

"Sure. No problem. They'll just have no job. And you can continue to believe that."

Ahh yes, the old, "You must lick the boots of your corporate masters for seeing to bless you with a few crumbs!" argument. It has never, ever held water.

"Amazon does not have extra money from sales to raise wages with."

That is a complete and utter lie.

"Their retail business runs at a loss actually. Raising wages would make things even worse."

The business as a whole, which is built on top of the retail business, is quite profitable. Them deciding to run retail at a loss does not change things.

"That's not what short changing is"

Yes, it is.

"There is no magic fairy that can go around giving people money, as you seem to think "just give them more money"."

Nobody is asking for a "magic fairy." They're pointing out that it's extremely unconscionable that the richest man in the world cannot afford to pay his workers a living wage.

"There's a reason we tell students to finish high school, and go to college or a trade school - to avoid these kinds of jobs."

And the people who don't have much choice should just go to hell? Seriously, what is it with this idea that people who weren't able to get an education, for whatever reason, don't deserve to be treated with dignity and respect?

The problem is, those people need to have jobs.

You're saying this like the tech companies aren't actually doing these things. Like they're somehow misunderstood; that they're not really eroding worker protections or anything like that.

It's not at all apples and oranges. Jeff Bezos became the richest person in the world in a large part due to short changing his employees. The two are linked together.

Not everyone can up and move like that.