RUG3Y

I use Sublime every day and have for the last year. Before that, I was using free editors that were ok but had some annoying weaknesses. $80 doesn't seem like all that much for a professional tool that I use to help make my living every single day. Compare this to my neighbor, a professional mechanic who has $150k invested in SnapOn tools - and makes less money than I do.

It does though. Things were quite different when the constitution was written. The federal government was never supposed to wield absolute power over the states. "...consent of the governed..." etc. It's pretty clear that they believed that a populace should be able to abolish their own government - they did so themselves.

Do you remember something called the "Revolutionary War"? It was an event in history that happened when the people who wrote the 2nd amendment fought the British government for control of the country.

When a consensus is reached among the governed that the government no longer represents them. Admission on the part of the government is not expected or necessary.

Belize is awesome, they like foreigners with money, nice climate year around, and they have far fewer laws than we do.

It's long-form journalism and I think it's perceived to have more value than bullet-point style reporting. While there can be value in long-form stories, 98% of the time I just want the bullet points so I can decide if the story is worth reading.

Radioshack TRS-80, later an Apple IIC Plus that was the computer I first really started learning on.

I would have helped you. But I'm categorically insane.

It really has nothing to do with biological sex. It has to do with our culture and society.

However it's done, it's my opinion that a couple should come to an understanding about practical and mundane details of their life situation before making serious commitments.

It sounds like you've got a good thing going...1 and 2 I can deal with, the quiet seething is a no-go.

It's a fancy way of making yourself appear to be a victim, conveniently with zero external evidence to support that claim.

You can look all you want for ways to please people, but there's no guarantee that you'll magically come across the very thing that will do the trick.

These are the kinds of issues you're supposed to discuss before you marry someone. She has higher standards, and she ends up doing all kinds of (unnecessary in her husband's mind) work to keep those standards, which are hers alone.

Term is used incorrectly to lambast half of the human species. It's not nitpicking to expect someone to use words correctly.

Spot on. Meanwhile the guy is working his ass off to try to make her happy, and she's complaining about "emotional labor", whatever the hell that is.

Yes, or at the very least, slow down to a reasonable speed instead of weaving in and out among the pedestrians. It's incredibly disorienting to have someone fly right by you at 20mph with zero warning. Scares the hell out of me every time.

I love biking and I'm a cyclist myself. But I once lived in a small mountain town where it seemed like a big percentage of the cyclists there had an attitude of entitlement about how they cycled. I've never had so many unsafe encounters with bikes, and at slow speeds too (speed limit was 25mph). I think the point I'm trying to make is that there are probably cultural differences between locations and the people who hate bikers have probably had some awful encounters in the past.

I still love cycling and I think it's the best way to get around. It sucks because my city is extremely bike-unfriendly and I don't feel safe biking here.

Crappy humans are crappy, no matter the mode of transport they use.

We don't treat websites like documents anymore. Instead they're interfaces. The old document style is much more readable.

I don't disagree. I feel like I'm caught in the middle. I personally prefer the old internet where websites could have simple design and typography and still be perceived to have value.

That sounds awesome except for that fact that my customers refuse to use modern browsers that support modern CSS features. GRRR.

Sounds like a lot more fun than the game "laser eyes" that we used to play when pointers became common in the 90s.

I read somewhere recently that their revenue is ~1 million annually from ads and affiliate links. I can't remember the source.

If a minister teaches practices and beliefs that are in opposition to the scripture that defines Christianity, is he Christian? This is clearly not a True Scotsman scenario. I can't call myself Catholic if I don't follow the pope. I can't call myself Muslim if I don't respect the prophet - and so forth. Joel Osteen teaches a philosophy that is far outside of the mainstream of Christianity.

Clearly there are people of all groups who are good/bad etc. The reason I entered into the conversation was to address the bigoted nature of above poster's assessment of what Christian people would do in a hypothetical nuclear war scenario. I suggest that you look at what Christian groups are doing in Texas right now as an example.

The characters in Seveneves feel like an afterthought that Stephenson needed to fill out a book about a cool idea he had. I personally found it uninteresting.

Cryptonomicon is my favorite work of his.

My point is that Christian people catch a lot of undeserved grief on HN for really no reason. I see a lot of people doing decent things in the name of Christianity, I don't see a push for "Christian Sharia Law" anywhere at all.

And Joel Osteen is a tool and a fraud.

I don't remember saying that Christians have a monopoly on disaster relief either.

I'm using DDG, ProtonMail, locally saved documents (because I don't need the cloud for the stuff I'm doing), Firefox Developer Edition, which has gotten so much better recently that I don't miss Chrome. Blogs/ personal websites are are static sites on Github pages or similar services. I have a crappy old iPhone4.

Just look at what Christian groups are doing in disaster zones this very minute: feeding, sheltering and clothing the needy. Terrible!

Because our shenanigans in Iraq, Libya, Syria, and dozens of other countries happened so long ago...Is that your argument? The United States is directly responsible for worldwide violence just within the last decade. I'm not talking about Thomas Jefferson here.

The government consists of individuals. George Bush. John McCain. Barack Obama. We'll likely never know who all of the people are that influence these terrible policies.

Yes. Some knowledge of history helps in these conversations. Crimea has been under Russian control in some form for hundreds of years and is the home of their most important naval installation. Under political pressure from the West, the felt that their position there was threatened.

Anyone who thinks America wouldn't do the same given the circumstances is mistaken. We're not the "good guys" in the world.

We do train to do that but I never assumed that we'd ever not lose anyone in that kind of combat. I'm certain that casualties would be high while assaulting a machine gun nest. The interesting thing is that we haven't done that kind of fighting in many years, probably since Viet Nam. Now we patrol the streets of the third world and get hit by snipers.