AlecSchueler

It's all over the README as well:

Inline overlay — Opens below the cursor, not as a fullscreen app. Dismiss without trace. Pure ANSI escape codes, no libraries.

Fuzzy search + typo tolerance — Damerau-Levenshtein distance catches typos.

Just that tone-deaf voice that can't tell what's useful information and what isn't but presents it all the same anyway.

Honestly what disappoints me about seeing this stuff come through unedited is that surely the human behind it had more time for checking over what was being communicated because they didn't spend the time writing the code etc? But they didn't, so what did they do? And now as a reader I'm expected to sift through and figure it all out?

I feel like this ship is sailing and I'm just turning into an old man shaking my fist at clouds but it's really sad to me that communication is become so fuzzy. Just throw whatever words up there and hope for the best.

Alternatively the male porn abuse epidemic.

Ok.

Maybe the village hasn't recovered but what about the descendants of the miners who now work service jobs in London?

You can mock the grammar...

I mocked nothing. I accused you of using unfair and unfriendly rhetoric.

AFAIK when the Soviet Union accused some Western power

So you're putting the words of "some Western power" that "as far as you know" once used a bizarre definition of colonialism in my mouth?

in the sense that oftentimes all the money, support and political representation goes overwhelmingly to some select places

Yes, totally different thing. People use metaphors and reappropriate words all the time. Irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

Don't forget the "label:" search in Spotify

I'm not sure what you mean by "when boats" exactly it why you used that phrasing, but it seems like an attempt at pre-emptively mocking a strawman, framing it as childish. That's not very nice rhetoric, is it?

These terms are well defined and it would serve you well to simply consult a dictionary.

But in short colonialism implies the use of colonies (surprise surprise) meaning the use of settlers to control or displace populations. There from comes the name

It also differs from other forms of expansionism in a few important ways.

- The power class structure is built on trade imbalances which move resources from the colonised land to the metropole without building up local economies.

- There's no absorption, the territories tend to remain separate and the colonised people can't become citizens or equals with those colonising them.

- And it's understood when speaking about things like the "colonial era" or "historical colonialism" that there was a deal of racial justification and stratification along racial lines.

You'll quickly be able to compare this list to whatever historical event you like.

That requires buying into the very concept that "colonialism" is a specific sin different (and worse) from ye olde "I am stronger than you and will occupy your territory and take your wealth".

It does, yes, and completely reasonably so. That's why it has a different name.

.. as if somebody decided that theft of, say, a smartphone, was a separate and much graver offence...

Yes, it is like that indeed and I'm sure you'll recognise the difference between intellectual property theft and the theft of a car, or the difference between stealing food from a supermarket and stealing food from a beggar.

I don't really buy it

It only makes sense to me if there is an underlying ideology

Ok? Maybe read some more about it. Right now it feels like you're the one pushing an ideology without really making an argument for it.

It may also come handy for distraction from domestic governance failures

Yes, it might. Governments have a host of ways to distract the public from issues. That doesn't change the reality of the history of, or contemporary effects of, colonialism.

... similar to the way the contemporary Russian propaganda ...

Boogeyman argument and an emotional appeal.

Those cases didn't involve colonisation. Though Virginia certainly did if you go back a little further.

"Colonialism" is a weird Western guilt fetish that some others successfully milk

Colonialism is the historical basis of almost all of global society today. It's not at all weird to be concerned with it when it still drives so much of the relative power dynamics between states and between people(s) today.

The example you're giving of Czechia and Prussia simply isn't an example of a colonial action.

At this point I'll be happy if there are future generations with the capacity to look back and understand what happened.

Both Europe and US's emissions are significantly (18%-30%) below their peak

Because they outsource their dirty work. To get a true picture of US/EU emissions you need to factor in the factories in Asia that are producing their consumer goods, as well as the global transport network that supports this.

And so will regulatory solutions so long as we have different states competing for resources.

Maybe we don't build them at all and plant some trees instead. Ireland could definitely benefit more from that.

Honestly kind of yes. The world is burning, and we can't keep growing like this. Tech optimism made some sense 20 years ago but a lot of us who have been here in that time are feeling pretty jaded.

So "things."

Isn't that where Silicon Valley is located? I'm pretty sure Californians are building things.

We're missing AI that doesn't still its hand held every step of the way.

The thing is, everyone's interpretation of "environmental impact" is different.

I know, that's why we've developed all of these systems of representation to discuss and come to reasonable regulatory standards.

But that's neither here nor there in regards to the point being made that people can still build things in a regulated environment.

The police are paid and trained to organise against crime. That's quite different than disconnected tourists beginning to organise, which was the idea I responded to.

if people simply DDOS

DDOS attacks are only "simple" when you can easily coordinate all of the distributed peers. In this case one or two people doing it might be a small annoyance but they're going to have a hard time convincing all the other tourists to turn their trip into a political direct action.

People can still "do stuff and build things" while having consideration for environmental impacts.

This is my hope as well but I'm doubtful. I'd expect it's more likely that the generations growing up with this stuff will enjoy being able to annoy their elders with it and fully embrace the human-less aesthetic.

So depressing to read the non-stop political comments here.

Is it really "depressing?" I get that it could be " annoying"if you don't want to read about politics ever at all. But depressing is difficult to imagine.

Honestly, knowing that people are still put off by an LLM that's been engineered to promote disinformation about things like "white genocide" is one of the few reassurances I have about the tech community these days.

In a "that's so recent" or a "that's so old" kind of way?

MySpace gave users a lot of freedom. That was great in certain scenarios but at it got bigger it meant there was just more noise and the general atmosphere was very messy for lack of a better word. Facebook was very clean by comparison and it felt natural to connect to people who couldn't handle MySpace, people in your family or at work etc. Then eventually it got big enough through that that it just became the place to connect with your cool friends too because "everyone" was there.

So yeah, it's kinda mixed. The core product was cool but it wasn't as suitable for as a replacement for the phone book in the way Facebook was.

There are three different supermarkets in my neighborhood but they all sell milk from the same two suppliers. It would actually be quite difficult for me to turn to a third brand.

You're defining work as a function only of time, but effort should also be calculated in.

Well "great" is rather subjective. But in terms of collective agreement we can conclusive say there really isn't anything like the art of the past made today.

Yes, but you claimed there was no great art in the "classical sense." Of course there's not; if it was contemporary then it wouldn't be classical.

Adding to that, your single data point to show the apparent vacuity of contemporary art which we can collectively agree on isn't very convincing at all when a dozen counter examples could trivially be found.

And all that while you admit yourself that what you're saying is completely subjective in any case.

It's why there really isn't any "great art" anymore, at least in the classical sense

This is a tautology, no? There's plenty of great art being made today by people feeling the same emotions as those in the past.