MustardTiger

Please be more patient :) Replying to posts you didn't read will not help us, definitely.

Just because some people have a different opinion than you, doesn't mean it is due to fallacious reasoning. Ultimately, it seems to come down to rust haters who have a sunken cost fallacy - I spent years writing bad code in bad lanaguages, so I don't want to give that up to do things better.

We're exactly talking about fire codes.

No we're not. That poster pointed out how fire codes helped, but that most codes do not. We're talking about building codes.

But fair, let's talk about lumber stamps. How much weight can a random hunk of wood support? Under what conditions? Do you know?

None of those things have anything at all to do with stamps. That's the point. If the code specified lumber by strength it would be fine. But it specifies lumber by "you have to buy it from an approved member of the lumber cartel" and makes absolutely no mention of strength.

Probably not, different ways wood can be treated

Building lumber is not treated. If you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, why throw out random nonsense?

But it's quite the reach to go from there to "Nah, let's get rid of them, they're in our way! Common sense will do just fine!"

Nobody suggested that. Responding to silly strawman arguments is not constructive.

No, they were done because of lobbying from the lumber industry. If you have any evidence that stamped lumber is superior in any way I would love to see it. Because if you've ever built a house, you'd know you have to throw away about 10% of stamped lumber because it is trash.

Acceptable as a source of lumber to build a house. You know, like the article we're discussing?

It really makes no sense. Quinoa has no upsides here, it is just fashionable with a small number of faux health nuts.

But we're not talking about fire codes, we're talking about building codes. The stamp on lumber does not make it less flammable.

This isn't about building codes. It's about stickers and permits

That is the building code. It is all about stickers and stamps. Why is a tree that grew on my land that I cut myself not acceptable? It has nothing to do with the wood obviously, it has to do with creating make work jobs for bureaucrats to "inspect" and stamp lumber.

This is a huge problem. Javascript has become a blight on the web, and browsers really need to make it easier to manage stopping scripts on background tabs and such.

You have a magic firefox then. I try to use it that way too, but its sitting at 1.8GB of RAM and 25-30% CPU usage with 103 tabs and it routinely bombs on me after a week or two when it gets up to 2.5GB or so.

It's less confusing when you focus on the 'freedom of the users'.

No it isn't. The entire purpose of the GPL is to restrict the freedom of the users. Public domain gives freedom to the users. Everything else adds restrictions. And it is all a big argument about which restrictions are "good" in the eyes of the people arguing.

So who are you using then? I don't see anyone that has a cap. Everyone charges you if you go over your allotted bandwidth.

It depends on the item. China is known for low quality goods because companies outsource to China to save money. They are telling the companies in China to make cheap crap. The manufacturers are perfectly capable and more than happy to make high quality items, it just isn't requested of them very often. It is always "use the thinnest possible" not "make it twice as thick as it really needs to be".

They're commercially available

At absurd prices though. It isn't just the shipping, small scale farm/market garden stuff is priced ridiculously high.

but in truth they deal with less knowledge than a subsistence farmer, who has to know a hell of a lot about agronomy.

If they had to then they would. Since they do not, obviously they do not have to. Very few farmers of any sort know much of anything about agriculture other than cargo cult knowledge that is largely misguided or inaccurate.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Don't go lumping us in with the alt-right. We're not even right wing.

You just linked to a honing steel that is incorrectly labelled on amazon as a "sharpening steel" (which no, does not exist) by the random vendor who knows nothing about the products they sell. Read the actual item description from wusthof:

"When that time comes that you need to touch up the sharp edge of your Wusthof knife the 10" steel is a good option. The Wusthof 10" inch steel can realign your knife edge quickly and easily. Honing steels are often confused as sharpeners. Your honing steel will realaign your knife edge but will not put a new edge on it. In trying to explain what a honing steel does try to imaging your sharpening steel and your toothbrush. It is a maintaince tool that you use everyday. In the case of your knife this would be maintaining the knifes edge. Now eventually you would need to see your dentist. That would be a sharpener. This would be a more detailed and agressive action and they would actually remove metal from the edge of the knife. Much like a dentist would do to your teeth. Now to maintain healthy teeth you brush everyday. To maintain a sharp knife you should steel your knife everyday. And remember only go to the Dentist(sharpener) once or twice a year."

You've been violating the site's guidelines by using it primarily to conduct political battles

What? I read what I find interesting, and respond if I have something to say. Your assessment of my use of the site makes it very clear that you are not succeeding in "suspend(ing) your political reflexes and consider(ing) other explanations".

But leave the initial off topic and inflammatory political attack there. Very unbiased non-partisan moderation.

He's already backtracking on ObamaCare, saying he wants to keep parts of it

He said that over 6 months ago, that's not backtracking.

unless you campaigned a lot to get more people to the polls in the Dem primary to vote for Bernie.

That would not have changed anything. There was no primary election, it was rigged. Perhaps try reading those leaked emails the media was telling you not to read.

Because if you're in USNE, you probably felt genuinely ill after hearing the nomination

Which is both a foolish assumption and completely off-topic and irrelevant. Even in the NE, millions of people voted for Trump. And millions more didn't vote for him, but are not so blinded by their little bubble of hate that they "felt genuinely ill" over their preferred candidate losing an election.

So if you're in a discussion about cultural differences between USNE and USMW, that's an entirely valid point.

We're in a discussion about diamonds.

Uhm, well, because I'm having a conversation about cultural differences between the midwest and the north-east

The subject is entirely irrelevant. You just bring it up to virtue signal, despite the fact that even in your best case scenario, 30% of the people you are assuming would want an apology are people who voted for Trump.

Sorry about Trump, BTW.

Why on earth do you think that sort of random political non-sequitur is appropriate?

I know it is in the guidelines. I am saying that I disagree with that guideline as it does not accomplish the goal the guidelines are intended to accomplish.

It does add to the comment. It hopefully encourages people to actually read the article. People can not contribute to a discussion constructively if they do not read the subject of the discussion.

I don't think it is either. But the post is under the misconception that twitter should be saved because it offers a free speech alternative to the other social media outlets.

Twitter is 100% opposed to free speech, and have stated policy that they censor views they do not like. There is nothing there to save for the sake of free speech. If you want some form of "social media" with free speech, you'll have to make it (and make it popular).

I expected better from NPR

I know this is going to sound snarky, but I really am genuinely asking: why? They have a history of very blatantly pushing their political agenda, most people seem to acknowledge that NPR is pretty left leaning. This doesn't seem out of place for them at all.

Except they are more likely to give up in other fields too. Even fields with lots of women in them. So no, your assumption is not backed by basic evidence.