Understood, we can't even have humorous conjecture about why sex boxes might be related to hackers. _You_ can post about sex boxes, and let material like that pass, but any similarly baudy comments to it: oh no!
I'm not interested in sticking within the personal tastes and pearl clutching limits of what 'dang' thinks people should talk about. What they should say. What is 'proper' for them to type according to dang's orthodoxy. My mind and mouth ain't your property, cunt.
Dang is a typical pathetic tinpot modictator piece of shit. Probably some otherwise profoundly unrespected, weak, unfuckable and ugly individual who's enjoying their little fief where "you have to do what I say now!".
I couldn't give the slightest flying fuck what dang thinks is OK speech. Dang can go and fuck him or her self, in a sex box or otherwise. Dang's thoughts, beliefs, attitudes, and opinion are worthless dogshit, with as much authority or credibility of that of a common street bum.
You Californian tech elite think you're going to get away establishing a 1st amendment free public square in which you unilaterally control what everyone can say, according to your personal whims and tastes. I submit you're all one day going to find yourselves severely mistaken in a _very ugly way_.
Go fuck yourself, maggot. Do me the favour of deleting my account now thanks so I don't get tempted to come back and waste more time mocking you for being a tinpot piece of shit.
How bad must these people feel about themselves after though. Driving out to some seedy "sex box" to pay to have uncomfortable car sex. The self disgust on the drive back must really be something lol.
I get the whole "home grown industry" and sovereign production of defense and all that, but just like when Australia tried to build its own submarines, really you're better off just buying them off the shelf from your allies who've already been ploughing billions into design and development of the things for decades.
How many languages do we need again? The amount of time we spend playing around with special case languages and frameworks. Would be nice if machine languages followed the lead of natural languages, with a single one slowly pushing the rest to the sidelines.
It'll be interesting to see how things pan out from all this.
The internet has only really been with us for a few decades, and yet has completely transformed the fabric of humanity, acting as a bizarre and extreme lens upon existing human traits.
At some point, logically, there has to be sufficient reaction to bring us back in line with what we came from. The "winner take all" effects from the internet are just too extreme to be feasibly sustained.
You can't have a happy society with such extreme gaps between rich tech people and everyone else living in tents or off what they choose to spend their money on. You can't have a happy society where the top 5% of beautiful men are paying people to schedule their calendar of tinder lays while other guys buy thot bathwater, or where the top 5% of women get all the attention and the rest wonder where their prince charming is who's been denied them from all this as they sadly pass 30 alone.
The fact is, a huge amount of bad has come from the internet. A seriously huge amount. And the opportunity cost of all that capital that went into enraged politics on twitter and inanity on facebook, that could've gone into medical research... At least we got Musk from it I guess.
It's a strange feeling. Being an active participant and facilitator in something that is clearly not naturally aligned with human happiness, only human progress. In the end, what choice do we have. This is our natural aptitude, and succeeding in it can mean the difference between living paycheck to paycheck and becoming financially free. So we're going to do it. We have little choice. But we can't say any of it is fundamentally good. At best we're peddlers of the neutral and inevitable.
I'm a big fan of the "fire and motion" concept of dev social paradigm.
The idea is that devs and large companies have a tendency to constantly move away from tried and tested concepts not because the juice is genuinely worth the squeeze, but because doing so forces the devs "in their dust" back into learning mode and out of productivity mode, thereby maintaining or creating leadership over them (i.e. you force them into playing catchup -- catchup to your new "hot" thing).
Case in point with this article: an attempt to declare that a tried and tested and widely used concept is now outdated, and they know the "right way" we should be doing it.
This paradigm is important from a dev management perspective, in that there must be an element of actively suppressing this in a dev organisation.
E.g. having approved tech lists so you don't have another half dozen js frameworks inserted over the next 12 months, requiring permission to stray outside standard paradigms, and compartmentalizing experimental time from production time.
Otherwise your dev output drops through the floor.
MVC is fine. Its a basic concept that aligns with the underlying hardware: model - memory, view - screen, controller - cpu. It ain't broke, don't let your devs fix it.
It would definitely look like 4chan. 4chan is a straightforward example of unrestricted speach. And its not a bad place, just different, but most people wouldn't enjoy being there.
Even places like this maintain a certain form of discourse by threats of bans.
But who won? Even assuming Ghosn committed a crime, they ended up looking like the crooks.
And one man succeeding in shady dealings hurts few. But the state succeeding in boundless detention puts everyone in peril. He may have some power, but there is no more powerful an entity than the state.
There's a basic rule of war: slow slow, fast fast. You slowly and quietly gather your forces and telegraph nothing, and when the moment comes, you unleash it all at once and unrelentingly. That's what they should've done. Not made a move until they had the evidence to put him away.
The fact they couldn't do crap for months on end just broadcasts to the world: "we don't actually have any evidence to convict him on".
Nothing's sacred in this world, not even habeas corpus, because no one can be arsed reading history -- it was never a matter of anyone forgetting it.
I disagree. It's more due to the rigid drumming in of "these are the rules you must follow" from a young age, backed up by harsh social ostracism of those who don't follow these social rules.
Children in Japan are taught at a young age to turn in even small found items, like a single small denomination coin, to the police station.
This bakes into them the sense that "that's what you do with found items" and coupled with the fact the police will return it to them if no one collects it, bakes in a sense of trust of the police at an early age.
Factoring in plea bargaining the US and Japan have roughly the same conviction rate.
Factoring in people held in US because they can't make bail, also diminished some of the "held without trial" margin. But this is fundamentally a bigger problem in Japan, as it has now embarrassed the country on the world stage due to the Ghosn case.
A state that holds people just becauss it doesn't like them, rather than due to evidence of breaking its laws, relegates them to the same league as the North Koreas of the world. Profoundly embarrassing for a first world country and a major step backwards in reputation.
My 1:1s with last boss I had went like: "how are things..." "good" "1:1 complete".
And that was on Slack.
The guy just hated them, so that was my idea and made him happy.
And I don't disagree with that. Sticking rigidly to one true cadence of one true meeting is a religious ritual we can do without.
If a 1:1 adds anything to your team, it indicates defects. Everyone should be raising issues as they come up and have a close enough working relationship with their boss that a cyclical meeting adds nothing.
And most of those questions are weak: bosses annoy and lose respect of their subordinates when they go all "facilitator" and "servant leader". A leader guides, they don't ask subordinates to tell them how to do their jobs. There are plenty of traditional ways to glean improvement information than appearing weak by asking "how can I be a better boss".
I'm not interested in sticking within the personal tastes and pearl clutching limits of what 'dang' thinks people should talk about. What they should say. What is 'proper' for them to type according to dang's orthodoxy. My mind and mouth ain't your property, cunt.
Dang is a typical pathetic tinpot modictator piece of shit. Probably some otherwise profoundly unrespected, weak, unfuckable and ugly individual who's enjoying their little fief where "you have to do what I say now!".
I couldn't give the slightest flying fuck what dang thinks is OK speech. Dang can go and fuck him or her self, in a sex box or otherwise. Dang's thoughts, beliefs, attitudes, and opinion are worthless dogshit, with as much authority or credibility of that of a common street bum.
You Californian tech elite think you're going to get away establishing a 1st amendment free public square in which you unilaterally control what everyone can say, according to your personal whims and tastes. I submit you're all one day going to find yourselves severely mistaken in a _very ugly way_.
Go fuck yourself, maggot. Do me the favour of deleting my account now thanks so I don't get tempted to come back and waste more time mocking you for being a tinpot piece of shit.
Please do!