The video is the topic of conversation, because it is a record of an achievement. A lowbrow dismissal of that achievement is, as you say, a valid contribution to a conversation about the video. But I would not put the achievement and the lowbrow dismissal on a level as you have suggested.
And for whatever it's worth, my kneejerk dismissal of the lowbrow dismissal is just as valid a contribution to the conversation. So, good day to you.
When I'm using parallel, it's usually because I have thousands of jobs. Worse, they have nontrivial memory requirements. When you background processes with &, the system starts timeslicing. Each process gets to allocate its memory before being paused to make time for the next process. Your system will almost immediately crumple under load. Hopefully, the oom killer will target your backgrounded jobs... but the script spawning them will go untouched because it isn't the thing hogging memory.
Before I learned of parallel, I tried a hack where I'd manually assemble jobs into batches, and wait on the batches before starting the next. It achieved very low system utilization, because inevitably, one job each the batch takes much longer than the rest. A slight improvement (still not good), is to use `split` to chop your jobs file into $num_cores chunks, and background each chunk. But still, this gets low utilization. Problem being that you aren't using a thread/worker pool.
Parallel (or, TIL, xargs) can maintain 100% system utilization, until the very last $num_cores jobs.
> This is pretty different from coming to school and telling 7yos about the sex party you went to this weekend and which gender you were identifying as when you went.
That sounds extremely specific. Do you have a source? Because I tend to agree, if somebody told my kid shit like that I'd also want them fired too.
> If you don't like DeSantis and want him voted out, please just say that
No, I want him voted out because of specific actions and I also want every politician inclined to take those specific actions voted out. I don't hate him because he's a Republican, I don't hate him because he's a straight white Christian man, I don't hate him because he's from Florida, I don't hate him. I hate the actions that he's performed (funny thing about that MLK quote; some people just cannot tolerate being judged by the contents of their character).
To pretend that the people behind these "school-board driven" actions are not motivated by, encouraged by, and supportive of DeSantis is completely ludicrous. Anti-LGBT activists are clamoring to join school boards around the country, looking to effect the same policies.
The "fun" of a vaguely-written law is that there isn't actually a prescription for what an "age-appropriate manner" is. And according to the verbal statements of a lot of the people pushing for these laws, any mention of sexuality is age inappropriate. This sets up a chilling effect where teachers do not have the liberty to teach effectively because they're concerned about blowback: even if they do everything right, a child can mention what happened into class to a parent, which can result in a mis-interpretation being reported to school administration, which comes down on the teacher.
But kindergarten classes talk about families. And many families have zero, one or two moms; zero, one or two dads. I'm one of two moms and other kids started asking questions about that when our kid was in kindergarten. The Florida law is meant to make kids like mine feel othered and isolated. It isn't about protecting innocence, it's about punishing deviance.
I had a teacher who taught a class that regularly featured his vacation photos because he spent his summers traveling. Sounds super corny, but he managed to make it interesting, and the first-person account brought to life the countries, religions and philosophies that we learning about. His wife occasionally showed up in those pictures.
My school also had two married teachers who shared a surname. We all knew they were married.
There were also a few teachers (band, orchestra, sports coaches) whose spouses would volunteer at events and travel with them.
Also quite a few teachers wore religious symbols -- cross on a necklace kind of thing. And quite a few of my teachers had pictures of their families on their desks. They didn't make a big deal about it, but evidence was in plain sight.
Now, I was in the high school in the 90s. I'm not sure when you think this changed.
On the other hand, stripping corporations of their speech, reversing Hobby Lobby and Citizens United, would be great. But that isn't the real objective behind this law.
There is a "satire[1]" meme floating with some disinformation about book bans in Florida. However, the state is second, only behind Texas, in actual book bans[2].
Relatedly, the vague "don't say gay" law has a significant impact on LGBTQ teachers right to free expression -- straight teachers are totally free to talk about their spouses, for example, but gay teachers are not. Quite reminiscent of the "don't ask don't tell" policy.