The landing page which is linked at the start of the second sentence of this page…? I don’t completely disagree with you, but this is mostly hypertext working as intended, is it not?
Yeah this meta commentary on HN is very confusing for me. The structure of the article is literally
- short paragraph saying "we launched neki"
- short paragraph saying why neki was needed
- paragraphs about what neki is (with a header)
That seems like a very reasonable structure for a blog post like this one. Not being able to get to the third paragraph of a blog post seems like a "you" problem, not a blog problem.
Celsius has plenty of resolution for this; in fact I would say Fahrenheit has too much. You can feel the change of one degree Celsius, you can’t really with Fahrenheit. To illustrate this, not only is your scale in tens, but I often only hear people quote the Fahrenheit temperature in tens. In Celsius we almost always give the whole number, because it makes a difference.
I would argue the same in most situations, but let’s be honest: what matters most to most employers is their employees falling in line. There is some sense to this: it is easier to manage a bunch of people doing things more-or-less the same way, but I do ultimately agree that professionals should be treated more like professionals.
This is divide-and-conquer rhetoric from someone who doesn’t want labour power. Workers would be much better off if we all stood together no matter how much we were paid or what our conditions were.
Edit: oh I see, your bio brags that you’re a scab, that explains it
Exactly. Unions don't have to exist solely because the company is evil and refusing to give workers a fair shake.
Unions are a compromise and frankly exist to provide a democratic path and open dialogue towards resolving issues before the workers are sufficiently pissed off that the only option left is a full on strike.
Some unions start with a strike but it's by no means a requirement.
after having had unions literally put me out of work as a blue collar employee - yes. i've had enough of them.
my family has also been in a long line of tradesworkers, and they have been continually screwed by their bargaining be it with the state trades, with nursing unions.
unions did nothing to save the hundreds of manufacturing jobs that were destroyed and taken away from upstate New York.
massena new york is now an absolute drug-ridden shithole but they still run around celebrating the handful of steelworkers that still somehow kept a job up here out of the hundreds and thousands across industries that got fucked.
so you know what? these white collar union LARP demands are just frustrating to stare at and look at and see how cushy they've had it while my brothers and sisters sit in rot.
Heavens forfend that those who work in an industry that preens and postures about innovation and reinventing every facet of life to be better try to build a better union. Oh, so taxis, software tools, the very act of courtship, loans, the concept of socialization can be innovated upon, but not labor unions? How unfortunate.
I'm curious: Why do you arguments against unions not equally apply to employers? Why do you blame the unions and not the companies responsible for it in the first place? Especially when you proudly admit you're partially responsible?
Since then, he also called for a pogrom against Romani people, in language that explicitly mirrored that which the Nazis used when calling for ethnic cleansing against the same group of people.
So you think it's entirely moral to label only white British people as "native Brits"? To speak warmly of Stephen Yaxley-Lennon's ("Tommy Robinson") marches? Unless you are also comfortably on the far right, I'm at a loss.
Wanting to forcibly eject all brown people isn't enough to call someone radically racist? That's not a middle-of-the-road, agree-to-disagree kind of stance.
No, I am sympathetic to his critics if that's what he is saying. I just don't see that in the article. But on the other hand, since this is an example of cultural replacement where the new folks happen to be disproportionately brown, this may just be a case of those who are passionate about the idea of racial equality getting a little incensed, which is understandable (laudable, even), but cultural replacement/disruption is a real and valid source of misery/desperation.
Your reading comprehension and political awareness needs a lot of work.
> cultural replacement/disruption is a real and valid source of misery/desperation
Not like this it isn’t. To the extent that there’s a valid complaint, it’s the fault of those who’ve been in power over the last few decades. To turn the blame on minorities is a classic rightist move, and it’s always cowardly, nasty, and wrong.
Since you’re happytoexplain, please explain to me what cultural replacement/disruption looks like in western countries. I can see it happening in countries like China with the Uighurs, in Bangladesh with the Rohingya, but I can’t see any actual “culture” erasure happening in Britain or Australia or the United States. I see plenty of cultural enrichment, but no erasure.
No need to be sarcastic and mock my username or my culture. I'm not asserting that you're an asshole or something because you don't agree that there is cultural disruption and/or replacement in London or parts of the US. The entire concept is subjective and highly experiential, despite (or because of?) the drama and trauma intrinsic to it. I will say though that elevating the definition to essentially require genocide minimizes reality.
Your username is self chosen. If you elect to be offended by people using it that’s on you. And like you, I’m not “asserting that you’re an asshole”. I’m also not “elevating the definition”. True cultural erasure involves the active banning and repression of cultural symbols (be they of language, dress, beliefs). If you have a different definition let’s hear it. Otherwise don’t put words in my mouth or project the chip on your own shoulder.
But this isn't happening. To cite someone with closer experience (who also does admit that the "migration issue in Britain is complicated and multi-layered") [0]:
> To all of that he adds a dash of Islamophobia, citing “Pakistani rape gangs” as one of the reasons for the unrest, repeating a weaponised trope borne from a long since discredited report from the Quilliam Foundation, an organisation with ties to both the the US Tea Party, and Tommy Robinson himself. A trope that exists despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of convicted child sex offenders are white men, with Asian men in fact under-represented.
People who want to be racist will find or invent any evidence necessary to dig themselves in deeper. There is no basis or validity to it. If there were, there would be no need to be so coy and indirect about it.
He explicitly says that nonwhite people feel alien and like they don't belong. He "heartwarming"ly embraces Tommy Robinson's white replacement marches advocating for forced "remigration" as a breath of fresh air against what he calls suicidal empathy. Must I show my work when adding 2 plus 2 or can we agree that the answer is 4?
>Must I show my work when adding 2 plus 2 or can we agree that the answer is 4?
This is arrogant in a damaging way. You should prefer to answer the asked question, since that would be an effective piece of information in this case (i.e. it's not a bait question, so it's not harmful to engage with).
The answers are present in the post we're discussing quite plainly without any reading between the lines necessary. I think the simplicity of the analogy is fitting. If not bait, there are few charitable explanations.
Commenter is, like me, mystified that reading comprehension can be that poor. Even without the linked post’s commentary, a plain reading of DHH’s original post should be enough to see exactly where he is politically. So to have to spell it out for you and others feels like we’re being taken for a ride.
> When wolves get out of control, you shoot them. When gypsies take over public spaces, you deport them. This isn't hard, it isn't cruel. It's the basic logic of self-preservation.
Dehumanization of an entire ethnic group by comparing them to animals. Use of violent rhetoric to forcibly ethnically cleanse a region.
There's a word for people who employ this rhetoric. Can you guess?
Those are of course just minimum viable proofs of concept for users with the CLI installed because they are succinct. Real malware could of course install the CLIs for the user helpfully or just directly access the database the next time it is unlocked and dump everything just as easily. A malicious browser plugin to dump the master password to bulk decrypt works just as well.
Decrypting -all- passwords any time you decrypt -any- password under the hood is an irresponsible design for a password manager, especially on modern hardware with so so so many other options that enforce rate limiting, hardware anchored encryption, and physical user consent.
Performative 2FA for every secret like 1password does when the binary has direct access to bulk decrypt all secrets in plain text with a key in system memory is a very strange choice given you could just have the hardware doing the individual decryption for a single secret instead of exposing the secrets that can bulk decrypt the whole database.
Well, they’re not minimum-viable if they don’t work, which they won’t for most users. It’s not a simple matter of the database being unlocked or locked, as I say it’s at least a per-process authentication, protected by the 1Password daemon. I’m not saying it’s a perfect system, but exaggerated mischaracterisation, with no apparent thought to the experience of the average user, doesn’t help your argument. You don’t seem to put much value in memory protection or process sandboxing. Yes with enough exploits you can do anything, but that’s true in any case. The fact is, 1Password is good enough for most people, and even at least one bank that I’m aware of. I’m willing to be convinced of a better implementation, but the fact you’re so scathing of something that works and has UX benefits over per-secret keying is off-putting. All design is trade-offs.
> The bucket is the coordinator — no membership protocol, no failure detector, no consensus.
Sorry, but for me, even being a heavy user of coding agents at work, LLM-isms like this on your home page make me less trusting in the care gone into the project.
Socialists want to seize the means of production in order to democratise it and move towards communism, which is exactly a post-scarcity post-state destruction of the [capitalist] economy. It is entirely compatible with giving everyone AI and a replicator - the free association of producers and all that. Marx would disagree that you can skip the state part on your way to communism, sure, and I think he’s probably right, but maybe not.
> We have better chances of collapsing capitalism from within.
Isn't that what Marx says? Capitalism is unstable and collapses from within. He identifies socialism as the next stage (seizing the means of production) that then leads to communism (fully distributed ownership and no real state).
We may of course disagree that these stages are what would actually happen. So far when the state seizes the means of production, it becomes highly authoritarian and doesn't want to relinqish power and move towards actual communism.
It's possible that Marx was right about that specifically, and that capitalism will destroy itself naturally through sheer technological innovation by automating everything to the point economics becomes irrelevant.
I'm deeply suspicious of any socialist or communist who desires to implement a socialist state, however. His prophecy must come true naturally, it cannot be forced via government mandates.
Socialists want to get rid of capitalism as the economic model and then transition to post scarcity. I want to keep capitalism until it destroys itself by making everything abundant and automated.
There is no need to "seize" anything. We merely need personal manufacturing technology.
reply