_glsb

This is an illusion.

The search “site:https://news.ycombinator.com/front Qunanbaiuly” (major Kazakh author) yields no results.

The search “site:https://news.ycombinator.com/front Shevchenko” (major Ukrainian author) yields no results.

The search “site:https://news.ycombinator.com/front Gogol” (major Ukrainian author that russia tries to appropriate) yields 1 article about russian theater!

The search “site:https://news.ycombinator.com/front Taamsaare” (major Estonian author) yield no results.

But the search “site:https://news.ycombinator.com/front Dostoevsky” yields 5 results.

5 > 0. Not an illusion.

Russia is known for using Russification as a method of oppression and genocide [1]. Dostoyevsky’s views are also pretty well known and their existence is not a matter of partisan opinion. If you are talking about Dostoyevsky, you are talking about core beliefs of russian fascist thought [2].

By preventing criticism of this, you are not neutral. This is not a political or ideological issue. It is a moral, humanist issue. And you know that.

... but we can randomize the username and/or do other things.

Please do those things in my case.

----

[1] https://www.coe.int/en/web/portal/-/the-forcible-transfer-an...

[2] https://war.ukraine.ua/articles/origins-of-rashism-ideology-...

[flagged]

Where do they commit this money? As in: what does it pay for exactly?

Binance is not the financial industry.

Most tankies are just LARPing as romanticized version of revolutionistas of the 50s and the 60s. They need a morally simple world view. Completely agree with you.

Again, problems with basic communication, it seems. Perpetuity means "forever". Because they have a finite amount of money and they are not generating money, they can't "fund wikipedia in perpetuity several times over".

They way they DO stay online for a resilient amount of time is by generating money, i.e. through donations.

In fact, they used to say exactly how many months they have left. Now they don't say that, because they feel they can allow themselves that. Does that mean that it makes sense to stop fundraising? No. Because the minute the public doesn't feel that there's an urgency in donating to your cause, then it's someone else's problem, meaning it's nobody's problem and that's how you kill NPOs.

That they are a non-profit funded by donations, maybe? Just a wild guess. /s

I mean, it's basic English. "Independence" doesn't mean "just enough for server maintenance" and "thriving" doesn't mean "barely surviving".

They don't though. The banner has a whiny tone, but never do they say that they are struggling to keep the site up.

That's not what I claim. I claim that there is a history of fascism in russia that has been so common place that people stopped noticing it. This can be exemplified by a number of things:

- Treatment of minority cultures (Finland as a counter example, which I give) - Popular media (movies -i.e. Brat 2-, and especially now the outright genocidal state media) - Popular culture (a cursory scroll through VK on the topic of Ukrainians should be enough) - I don't even mention the systemic antisemitism during the soviet times.

If you are russian, you have a choice. You can nitpick and misinterpret my arguments, which -personally- I don't care about. Or you can think about how your own society has failed to uphold humanist values both towards your neighbours and your own compatriots. You can point fingers at the USA, but it won't make your country better and honestly, I bet the majority of people would feel safer having USA on their side, rather than russia. Armenia is a case in point. Nobody says the Americans or EU are holy, but russia is worse, china is worse, iran is worse.

At this point, it is safer for the rest of the world to not engage with russia and contain it until, at the very least, it starts upholding the international treaties and agreements it signed.

Individual productivity is not a metric to optimize for in an org.

The point of spammers or ransom ware authors is to survive as well. Doesn’t mean they are valuable.

If you say that russian culture is valuable, you must set the context why.

It doesn’t communicate anything particularly original. It’s not especially beautiful (arguably). It didn’t stop and some might argue even enabled the carriers of that culture to either tolerate a genocidal regime or actively support it. What’s the point of it then?

What’s the point of the moral dilemma in “Crime and punishment” for example, if their choice is always “let’s kill another old lady because we can”?

I think it’s important to understand that russian culture has failed.

If it can’t guide a nation towards humanistic values, what is a culture’s point?

Probably not, since they have more money and can’t be outlawyered like an intern could.

This is interesting! For me - we just didn’t hear about differential dataflow. But we will probably use it in an upcoming project, because I was looking for a solution like that.

Cool. I'll use WSL though.

One reason might be, is that they might need to in part work with a server-side system that runs on Linux and it’s easier this way.

But maybe they also need to work with stuff thats Windows only. Say they need to produce media assets with the Adobe suite.

Not everything is vimmable.

I’ve reached the bit about Aristotelian metaphysics (why??) and I still can’t tell what is the author’s point.

EDIT: Alright, I’ve skimmed to the end and it seems to me it is a very r/iamverysmart way of saying “I prefer to use RefCell”.

Honestly, I have trouble trusting someone’s judgement in programming language semantics when they can’t seem to be a good judge of their own written language semantics.

Why define an agent at the beginning, but leave “agency” undefined? What does even “capability to act in a certain environment” mean? Is a function/method something with “capability to act in a certain environment”? Is a C++ class that??

Also:

It is also a category error to treat them as “real objects” since “real objects” and “programming objects” have little connection with each other ontologically.

Mate, you link to the Wikipedia article about categorical errors, where it says that a CE is defined as comparing things that are ontologically different, thus showing your whole sentence as a tautology. What’s the value added for the reader??

I mean the "rc" in those names stands for "run command". To me they are initialization scripts.

Also, Bash is a scripting environment (sort of), and VimL is a solid part of vim. These are scenarios, where you don't add undue complexity or bugginess to the software. But personally, I wouldn't kid myself and pretend that I can write applications as solid as bash or vim.

Makefiles are just bash scripts with dependency resolutions. So again, scripts and not configuration.

If somebody hands over an application to me where configs have unit tests, this means to me that the application can fail catastrophically under certain (unwanted) configurations. And seeing how I might be the owner of said applications, chances are high that at some point I would need to change the configs.

I, personally, would rather prefer straightforward static configuration and very well written documentation on why certain configurations make more sense than others. That way, I know how and when to change something in the configs.

I absolutely do not share the view that "tests are documentation", because they do not communicate the most important thing in software engineering - the intent and reasoning behind a certain design.

Proof, no. But ensuring it in terms of manual labour is far easier with a static file, than debugging a convoluted script pretending to be a config file.

I agree with you. The idea of programmable config languages is really, really misguided. Whenever somebody wants to use something like that, it's a sign for me that they haven't thought out their design properly and are content of letting abstractions leak into the config.

You peddling horsesh*t is unhelpful. Your fluid goal posts don’t help either.

Obviously any U.K. style “monarchies” and republics with a figurehead. Your best bet therefore would be Middle East monarchies, which are obviously a product of the extraction industry. So even that is not an argument.

Remember how China realized that the communist system isn’t sustainable and introduced elements of monarchy? No? Me neither, because they went with (very light) democratization.

If you want to talk facts, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi...

But my favorite part is when I suggest you to look for immediate evidence in the real world and you’re like: “No, here’s a cherry picked article”. This disregard for facts is just plain offensive.

His views are all just hand wavey fascism. At no point does he make a tractable argument.

As a counterpoint: take all countries today that have functioning (i.e. non-figurehead) monarchies and compare them with democratic, capitalist countries. You can use prosperity, GDP per capita, average literacy - whatever as a metric and monarchies will fail.

Imagine the following future:

“Have you linted and unit tested your commit message?”

“Junior Developer wanted. 10 years of Conventional Commits experience required.”

“Download Conventionalizer! Now you can write Conventional Commits in plain English, having all the syntax automatically generated! (node, erlang OTP and Jerry’s pre-alpha TensorFlow binding library required. Windows support coming soon.)”

Something tells me the authors are hard at work solving a problem nobody needs solving.

I bet Windows 95 is older than you.

So, you're OK with communist massacres?

You can spare me the Che Guevara fanboyism. I was born in the Soviet Union and had to read the biography and the history of the Cuban revolution (the soviet version of it, at least). One would think, that having been blessed to be born in a communist country, I'd reap all of its benefits. But surprisingly, it wasn't the capitalist imperialists, who have sent my great grandparents to a prison camp in Siberia never to be seen again just for owning a cow. And surprisingly, it wasn't the dastardly capitalist imperialists, who have murdered 7 million of my compatriots through an induced, and surprisingly very geographically concentrated famine. One would think that grain is transportable, but there you go: apparently not. No, it was the benevolent communists.

But you know what? There's this country called Guatemala, that for 10 years was kind of doing OK, and was a liberal capitalist society. But let's call it communist for the sake of the argument. They tried confiscating (not buying out, but straight out taking away) property from a very powerful player, after which the capitalist imperialist player started arming and training 500 men and telling fibs about the president on the radio. The 500 men failed militarily, but the army decided to surrender anyway. All of that cannot of course be evidence of a deeply embedded social instability and political apathy, but clearly shows that democracy doesn't work. We weren't talking about democracy at all, but there you go. So, yeah, if you disregard all of the above, we super-duper promise that Guatemala could have become a communist utopia. This "could've" of course invalidates all the deaths and misery communism inflicted upon the world in the extremely short period of time it existed, and proves beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it isn't related to the endemic abuse of power and corruption that seems to follow it all the time, and totally works. We promise. Especially when it allows western people, who have never stood in a 3 km long line for toilet paper and have never gone hungry in the 20th century to feel morally superior by accepting 1st-world-guilt, yet being able to absolve oneself from any moral responsibility by shifting the blame to a cabal of disembodied corporations.

/s

Can you name one example of a communist system, where that metric is so small, it's negligible?

Name one.