ss108

? This is just dumb. Who cares whether they were armed? The point is that they had the motive to do wrong and they took action in furtherance of it. They don't deserve leniency for being various forms of incompetent.

It's pretty disgusting you'd make the moral choice to peg the media as lying instead of being appalled that people stormed Congress and fought the capitol police.

> But I think you should recognize that there is a good chance you'd have the same beliefs if you had the same life experience.

What's the point of this line of thinking? Ok, maybe we'd also join the Taliban if we grew up in orphanages in Pakistan after Russia invaded Afghanistan. So?

The thrust of your arguments here (the article and the life experience thing) seems to be to not hold anyone morally accountable for anything.

Not all of the people who stormed Congress believe in QAnon, nor did I even cite that as a reason at all, so who cares? Can't really see why you brought it up except to try to strawman.

> QAnon nuts aren't all conservatives, just as the people inciting riots and looting during BLM don't represent all liberals.

Logical error here; your point would make sense if someone said "all conservatives are QAnon believers".

The problem isn't "black and white thinking"; it's somehow shrugging your shoulders at the fact that a former president of the US incited a mob to storm Congress in an attempt to stay in power, as if this is some kind of third-world country. "Oh but don't hold people voting Republican accountable for that", you argue. Why not? Party hasn't even held him accountable and are likely going to nominate him again.

You want to exit big tech, but don't want to give up the comp? I think you may have to make a tough choice.

I understand your perspective, but I do not think that they do not understand that the things are bad. From what I can tell from conversations those people, they, for the most part, just don't give a shit about what's good and bad.

Yes, unfriended in real life.

Your examples are so many degrees removed that I do not think they are apposite. For example, people who supported Trump did so with full knowledge of his attitude towards immigrants, asylum seekers, etc., his rhetoric about building the wall (which many of his supporters cited specifically as their reason for supporting him), his "birtherism" re Obama, etc. Thus, they can much more strongly be said to affirmatively support those things than, for example, an American taxpayer whose money goes to help the Israeli government bulldoze Palestinian homes, or do any of a number of other foreign policy things that qualify as "evil shit".

I had friends who became Trump supporters, and I unfriended them. I believe in morals. I believe in God. There's no way I can be friends with people who, at best, only pay lip service to those concepts while using them to further patent evil.

To be clear, I'm not really on the "blue team" either. But that's a team that hasn't been taken over by the worst of its fans, nor is it motivated by things such as xenophobia, willful and prideful ignorance, and malice.

I think the view that you are advocating for basically bends morality to accommodate the fact that so many people have to do and believe x. I'm a religious person. I don't believe in changing the criteria just to avoid an unsavory conclusion about people.

(To be clear, I mention the God thing not so much as a "holier than thou" thing, but in allusion to the fact that these differences cannot be bridged--I find it incredibly idiotic when people say things like "we need to talk to each other more to stop the division". Such a thing would only fuel the division, in my opinion.)

> You just classified 46% of voting Americans as bad people

So? You judge the moral and intellectual merits of things by how popular they are? That's your call. I don't.

> Both sides have outspoken nut jobs stealing the spotlight

Not really. Only one set of nutjobs actually stormed Congress in an attempt to overturn the results of an election. You've bought into a narrative that minimizes what is an insane fact.

There is a non-zero chance that angels and magic are not real, and the chance of aliens being real, while perhaps greater, still relies mostly on conjecture, and is ultimately pretty close to those two things.

Leaving Iraq earlier would have been fucked up. We would wrecked the country, destabilized it, raised the problem of sectarian warfare, and then bounced. We still basically did that, but at least helped it with ISIS before leaving.

As it is, we arguably owe it more.

You can see what the result of leaving Afghanistan has been. We should have devoted more resources to nation building there.

Not sure what you think is "propaganda" about concerns about Russian aggression in Ukraine or about China's evils.

Even Afghanistan wasn't a matter of propaganda so much as other flaws/isaues, such as overreactivity and hubris.

Ehh, why, in the 80s and 90s, should anyone have assumed that an economically advancing China would continue to be authoritarian and illiberal? Genuine question. It's easy to say globalization and free trade didn't deliver on the democracy and international norms promise in hindsight, but was there much reason to doubt that idea before it was too late?

I'm a China hawk, but I hope it doesn't come to that.

Would like to point out something relevant: China and India kill each others soldiers fairly frequently. I find it rather remarkable their issues haven't escalated.

In biglaw, people at most firms are paid this way up until, IIRC, the 8th year.

I think there are many ways in which it is fair. As far as dev jobs, who can usually say, at a big tech company, for example, that one dev adds 200k of value, and another 280k? Aren't salaries artifacts of negotiation and market forces at time of hire than accurate reflectors of job performance?

Noooo this is all I use Edge for and now they messed it up

GitHub seems to be doing fine/the same, IMO. What negative consequences have there been for you as a user as a result of MSFT acquiring it?

Not sure what you missed about Zoom. It's works, but doesn't feel smooth and seems to have a very big footprint for something with a specific use-case.

In particular, my day job is at a big corpo office space style place, and the software that requires the most updates is Zoom. I don't get why. It's also a lot less simple to use than Google Meet

Thanks

I want to, but it's tough. How have you been filtering things?

Yh I'm gonna say it's not irrational propaganda to say the country engaged in a genocide and which enforces covid lockdowns in draconian fashion, including by killing pets, is a baddie.

...where is the link to it

Sounds like this guy didn't "learn" anything. He just wasn't acquainted with the internet before.

Also, his referring to the Irani person's tweet as "ethnonarcissism" is telling as to the author's own blindspots and obliviousness. Seems to me rather convincing that this is a first-world problem.

Gundams when

In my social mileu (highly and elite educated, coastal, etc) that's not accurate at all. I am literally the only one of my friends who adheres even partially to a traditional organized religion and believes in traditional values. My friends don't quite know what to do with this. Some are gay themselves, none of us think twice about it.

As someone who has grown more traditional and religious over the years (I'm 32), I agree.

I dislike it greatly and accumulated 200k+ in extra student debt.

I am trying to switch back to software engineering now.

Yes.

Also, can you imagine how Trump and right-wing media would have bitched if these moves by the Fed occurred during his administration?

DEep StatE Fed bureaucrats trying to win election for socialists, etc

? For one thing, the Fed isn't really part of the administration. So the executive branch can attempt to take credit for the statistic even while the Fed tries to destroy it.

This is quite accurate.

Relevant username?