thatswrong0

I was absolutely hooked. Shit was funny as hell. Hopefully they can get it sorted out sooner than two weeks... unfortunately Twitch doesn't really have much in the way of consistency and discretion when it comes to bans.

> Cops in this country are just gang thugs.

Even worse: they have the law on their side.

It's also scary to think of the number of incidents like this that go unreported and unseen only because they don't result in death.

No idea if it's even possible fix this issue though... it would probably have to involve having more stringent aptitude tests, psychological evaluations, training (and a complete rewrite of that training), and subsequently higher pay, and this would have to happen in every state and in opposition to police unions.

This same vacuous argument could be applied to the book itself: Pop-sci books like this make a million claims and take an inordinate amount of time to verify. And by that time it doesn’t matter, the claims will already have been accepted as true.

See how pointless this is?

Seriously, the whole argument is so flimsy. Very few people know or care about all of the extraneous arbitrary make-work causes and movements that Wikipedia donations are actually being used to fund rather than the core site.

And that’s the whole crux of the argument that OP conveniently ignored: that the banners make it seem like Wikipedia needs the money, when it doesn’t. WMF, on the other hand, does need it so it can continue to grow its spending exponentially on causes no one cares about and have nothing to do with Wikipedia itself (which is what people actually care about and probably think their donations are being used to support).

Wikipedia is spending almost twice as much in 2021 as in 2017, while page views only inched up a little bit [0]. Whatever they’re spending it on, it’s not going to keeping the site running or improving the quality of it by, say, actually paying quality editors. They’re certainly not strapped for cash like they pretend to be in their donation banners.

From a 2017 post:

> The modern Wikipedia hosts 11–12 times as many pages as it did in 2005,[20] but the WMF is spending 33 times as much on hosting,[21] has about 300 times as many employees, and is spending 1,250 times as much overall.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Guy_Macon/Wikipedia_has...

[0] https://stats.wikimedia.org/#/all-projects/reading/total-pag...

ADS-B data is public information. Anyone who wants to target Elon for whatever reason using this data does not need to go to Twitter to do it. Whereas.. private medical information is private.

Why on earth are y’all licking one of the richest people on Earths boots. The man is clearly using his power and money to stifle speech that that is critical of him. That’s not something that needs defending.

Paparazzi invade into peoples lives and don’t allow them any sense of normalcy in either public or private. They capture intimate moments, draw focus to people’s bodies, and stir up media frenzies about mundane aspects of being human.

Posting ADS—B data is not anything close to resembling that. Elon Musk claims to have “started” Tesla in the name of sustainability and yet personally is responsible for dumping more carbon in the atmosphere than god knows how much compared to the average person. Pointing out this hypocrisy with publicly available data is not a bad thing, and is nothing like the paparazzi.

> Putting someone's life in a spotlight without their consent

Elon Musk acquired Twitter supposedly in the name of free speech. He then chose to post borderline transphobic thoughts on Twitter because he knew it would stir the pot amongst his ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY MILLION Twitter followers. He then chose to go on stage at the end of Dave Chapelle's set in front of a _lot_ of people, and was booed by a large percentage of said people. When someone decided to post a video of this on Twitter, that persons account was banned.

Does that sound like someone who doesn't want to have their life put in the spotlight? Or does it sound like an attention seeking hypocrite who is using his money and power to try to silence people who question his extremely questionable actions?

There are millions of good hills to die on. I have no idea why one would choose to willingly throw themselves onto a mountainous pyre of bullshit.

The rich and powerful do not need bootlickers to defend their shitty actions.

And I say this as someone who until recently thought he has caught a bit too much flak for some of his immature antics.

When you're one of the richest people in the world, and you're using your power to influence public opinion, having your already publicly available travel information posted online is not at all equivalent to doxxing.

Jesus.

Sick behavior? In what way? It's publicly available information.

I posted in that thread - saw a cardiologist and they confirmed it. In retrospect, it was probably the worst illness I've ever had, being completely out of commission for a month at age 29, where even doing simple things like rolling over in bed would cause my heart rate to spike and cause me to be short of breath. Couldn't do anything but lay there. Luckily a scan confirmed no long term damage.

For some reason still decided to get the third booster.. and I still ended up getting COVID twice (very mild both times). Don't think I'll be getting any more COVID vaccines.

This looks great, but I feel like calling this a successor to Webpack in its current state is disingenuous, considering the roadmap literally says: “Currently, migrating to Turbopack from Webpack is not yet possible.”

At least the marketing website is snazzy ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

SF, not SFO

In the US, 60% of firearm deaths are from suicide. There are, on the other hand, ~430 accidental firearm deaths per year. Not saying reducing accidental deaths isn't a good thing, but in terms of efficacy, the dollar spent per reduced death, I feel like there might be better ways other than a buyback program.

Academia seems to have redefined racism to mean systemic/institutional racism, and the result a whole slew of confusion and counterproductive conversations.

Which is bananas to me since IMO racism and systemic racism were already pretty well defined terms.

Agreed. Maybe I've had this wrong most of my programming career, but comments are usually for explaining the "why" of code if the code isn't that obvious by itself (and if this is the case, I usually try to refactor it first). It's rare that my comments ought to take precedence over the code itself.

If I do have something REALLYIMPORTANT (which is exceptionally rare), I plaster it all over so that it's practically not missable (esp. in code review). Sure, highlighting _that_ comment might help a bit during development, but I really don't think that use case is worth highlighting _all_ code in that case. But it could be a 'nice-to-have' for syntax highlighters.

Not the OP you're replying to but: I think there's a chasm between what views Republican voters hold, and what the Republican party stands for, and not being able to distinguish between the two leads to people talking past each other.

And yet, being a Republican voter means implicitly endorsing the views of the Republican party. So maybe this chasm doesn't matter. If you vote for a person who explicitly is against climate change, LGBTQ+ rights, etc., then that says something about your own personal philosophy.

> They're pretty flexible about restricting edge cases

The RNC is most certainly not however. No matter how many kids die in school shootings, any attempt to seriously tighten up the rules is met with a chorus of "they're taking our guns!". Getting anything passed took us.. how many school shootings?

> Republicans want to not be removed from a pseudo-public forum for holding a minority opinion - surely you can empathize with that framing?

Well, that framing is pretty disingenuous. And Republicans generally support that businesses should be able to serve whoever they want. Labelling a private company's platform as a pseudo-public forum is also at odds with the general ethos of "don't let the government tell me what to do". On top of this, the general outrage about deplatforming often entirely ignores the series of platform rule-breaking that leads up to said deplatforming.. and yet then if an unarmed black person gets killed by a cop, you'll so often hear cries of "just follow the law" coming from the right side.

In short, I consistently see Republican politicians / pundits / voters completely abandon their ideals the moment it begins to personally affect them. (Note: this until-it-affects-me probably explains the party's platform about LGBTQ+ issues, racial issues, etc.)

> OK I'm beginning to think you're not being honest with your experiences

Most of my family members, as the whole, are what I would call "reasonable republicans" who generally care about the principles of small government and not interfering too much with the economy. And yet some of them too occasionally fall into the Fox News inspired trap of labeling anything related to social welfare as "socialism". It's a real thing man.

Yeah, I've had a few experiences that resulted in an extremely similar train of thought (minus the ER). Terrifying but pretty interesting.

Depends on your perspective.

I know the more I’m on my phone, and the more social media I consume, the more I feel that way. But when I actually get out into the world and meet people and do stuff.. it’s not nearly so bad.

And it’s cheesy but: “grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.”

Blind trust, and only allow index funds. Maybe forever after holding office, to further dissuade corruption.

So you're a fan of having laws enacted by representative elected by these religious fanatics? I'd much prefer a little elitism as an alternative.

I don't see how smart roads would solve the issues of "the unexpected".. weird pedestrian behavior, getting cut off, parked trucks, construction, etc. It seems to me that smart roads would only solve the issue of general routing, and that already seems to be dealt with as far as I can tell.

Other cars did try to pass through the intersection, and were also stopped / surrounded / jumped on. But for a lot less time, with fewer people jumping on it, and as far as I can tell, the Waymo was the only one that was tagged. Definitely would not have been a pleasant experience.

And all cars were eventually let through after some heckling / jumping.

I was actually there for this event (just as a spectator): most of the people were gathered down at the intersection. The car came down the hill, and then it slowed down as it approaching the intersection because there were.. obviously a ton of people in the intersection. _Then_ everyone swarmed the car / surrounded it / jumped on it / tagged it. It basically didn't move while this was happening. Then eventually the crowd let it through.

Do you honestly think that the news should give more attention to the current president's son fucking up in an as-of-yet-to-be-determined-importance way versus an actual congressional hearing about our former president inciting an insurrection against the capitol?

What is considered a scandal now has been forever skewed by the insanity that was the previous presidency. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

TBH, I don't think the photos were ever going to be that much more groundbreaking to your average person, given the fact that the angular resolution of the telescope is roughly equivalent to the Hubble.

It's got a much bigger mirror, so why is this the case? Well, it's because the Webb works primarily in the longer, infrared part of the spectrum, not the visible. Resolution is related to the diameter of the mirror and the wavelength being studied - the longer the wavelength, the bigger the mirror you need to achieve the same sharpness.

But working in the infrared part of the spectrum means that Webb can look further back into the past, because the oldest light created by the earliest galaxies has redshifted out of the visible spectrum because of the expansion of the universe. So we'll be able to collect and see much older light from much younger galaxies with Webb that Hubble literally cannot detect because of this redshift.

On top of this, infrared, being a longer wavelength than visible light, allows us to see through dust clouds more readily. Notice how many more stars are visible in the Carina Nebula comparison.

Lastly, the Webb has other instruments such as a spectrograph that allows us to determine the chemical composition of distant objects (such as planets). We can point it at an exoplanet and determine, say, if it has water in its atmosphere.

In total, it means marginally better photos for the general public, but a great deal of new data for scientists that should greatly further our understanding of the universe.

Just needs to include exposure time differences and this is perfect. Glad to witness the power of this fully armed and operational battle station.

There's no state in the United States in which pedophilia, or committing espionage / terrorism is legal.

> but in general Americans who support women's reproductive rights favour more government overreach, not less

Compared to what?

React components don't function like regular JS functions, but look like regular functions. So that's obviously not a legitimate knock against them - you're working within the React runtime. It's not normal Javascript.

And lifecycle methods are just as "magical" as hooks. If you just thought about why the "rules of hooks" exist for a moment instead of just hating change for the sake of it existing, you could probably intuit how they work under the hood.

Lastly, lifecycle methods don't allow you to co-locate feature-related code, can actually create more bugs (if you have logic in `componentDidMount` but forget to add something similar to `componentDidUpdate` for example), and any logic contained within lifecycle methods isn't composable / reusable.

I really don't understand where you're coming from at all with this.

From what I can tell based on the news coverage, GPS trackers didn't exist before AirTags.

But seriously though, this does seem like the kind of thing Apple and Google should collaborate on and establish a standard so that any mobile operating system can notify people of unwanted trackers without requiring the installation of an app.

Tbh I don’t understand how that’s possible given how quickly conditions on the road can change.