Yeah, the rules have kind of made the passive investment active. I don't understand OPs point at all. I don't understand why we suddenly change the rules and rush things, and OP has provided 0 justification for that.
China buys 80% of Iran's shipped oil. But this affects the prices of pretty much anyone who imports oil - if China can't get oil from Iran, they'll purchase it from someone else. Less supply => higher prices for everyone.
o/ I'm a silent majority member for sure. I've seen these complaints before and I nod my head every time remembering that "Oh yeah, this DOES suck but I just put up with it because it happens so frequently and there ain't no way I'm switching ecosystems".
Sidenote: please Apple, if I type the same misspelled (but not) thing two times in a row, just leave it be. And no, I did not mean "what the he'll". And why is selecting text so hard.
Yeah right. AI art models can and have been used to basically copy any artist’s style many ways that make the original actual artist’s hard work and effort in honing their craft irrelevant.
Who profits? Some tech company.
Who loses? The artists who now have to compete with an impossibly cheap copy of their own work.
This is theft at a massive scale. We are forcing countless artists whose work was stolen from them to compete with a model trained on their art without their consent and are paying them NOTHING for it. Just because it is impressive doesn’t make it ok.
Donald Trump also openly mocked Nancy Pelosi and her husband after the attack on them, which was done by a Trump supporter who believed Pelosi was trying to steal votes from Trump (which, for the record, was a FAILED assassination attempt). He did nothing to condemn this violence:
Are you just going to ignore stuff like, I don't know, January 6th? When has the left done ANYTHING approaching what Trump and his followers did there?
> We pledge to you that we will root out the Communists, Marxists, fascists, and the radical-left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country, that lie and steal and cheat on elections … The threat from outside forces is far less sinister, dangerous, and grave than the threat from within. Our threat is from within.”
And yet you're going to say that violating the Constitution (the 1st freaking amendment) is a deradicalization effort by this administration?
> it's nonsensical to believe that someone beloved by most people in the right wing would be targeted by a fellow right-winger
Look up groypers and Nick Fuentes - he's a right winger who was NOT a fan of Charlie Kirk and amassed a following about it. There is _some_ very mild evidence to believe that it's possible (I personally don't think that's the case FWIW)
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.
That happened because they repeatedly violated rules on Reddit, not because of their extremist views. Reddit was lenient with them for a looong time.
> We need to allow people on the edges of the spectrum to say what they want even if it is without merit
/r/jailbait was banned, but it was technically "free speech" and technically legal, so according to your standards Reddit should have allowed the community to continue to exist, right? (Even though it existing probably led to some deviant / reprehensible / illegal behavior)
But to me, it's obvious that that doesn't need to be allowed to exist on the platform. So to me, that means there is some line that we as a society draw between allowed speech and not. It's not codified in law, but it does exist. That line can move based on the whims of society.
Right now, at least in the tech world, that line seems to be moving in such a way so as to not allow right-wing extremist speech. And that's totally fine in my book - in the same way that /r/jailbait is rightfully considered unacceptable "free speech" now, so is right-wing extremist "free speech".
There are still places to congregate online for that sort of speech if you want. Or you could spin up your own server. It's not disallowed by law. But it's just not as accessible as it was before.
I do think that there is some kind of implicit framework living within a smart combination React, Redux, and Immutable.js that combined with something like Uncle Bob's clean architecture could probably become a standard within the React world. My company is maybe 50% of the way there towards such a thing, and it really is a pleasure to work with.
React _is_ only a view library. It shouldn't have any thing to do with things like Ajax - that's part of what makes it simple to work with l. It does one thing and does it well.
It doesn't even seem to be the responsibility of Redux, which more so is consider with prescribing _how_ data and actions flow through your system, not how exactly those calls touch the outside world.
I don't like employing the phrase "separation of concerns" that often / without serious thought, but this is seems to be a valid use case for it. Presentation components shouldn't care about how fetches data, they should ideally just be a function of their props. Even container components should only care about what data they are accessing, not how it comes to be in the data store.
What you're asking for could just be a plain JS library - when you ask for certain routes in your app, fetch some data. When it comes in, handle all those edge cases you describe. Update the data store. When that happens, we're finally back in Redux land. It doesn't care about how you fetch your data, all it cares about is _that_ you touched it at all.
