wsatb

Based on this outage: not very well.

I’m really not convinced these serve a genuine purpose at all. Beyond them always being in your way, they seem to be incredibly inefficient. This is something that would work better in a large building like a hospital, a mall, or an airport, rather than city streets.

Anthropic and OpenAI won't be around in 1-2 decades if this is their long term plan. People are not going to revert, but go elsewhere. China is proving that it can be done cheaper.

"Nothing is subsidized" is a wild take. They might be making money on some users, perhaps even most users, but certainly not all. Also, "subsidized" doesn't just mean on compute.

I guess enjoy it while it lasts? OpenAI won't be able to subsidize that forever either.

How do you defend these slimey companies? They’re actively running a mob casino and you still have people acting like government is the bad guys here. That doesn’t mean there can’t be better regulation of other markets, but comparing prediction markets to stock markets is a huge stretch.

They already made the argument themselves: they’re skirting current laws by calling them financial derivatives.

The results usually seem completely random to me. It's like the feature never made it out of proof of concept territory. The only advantage of all the email noise Jira sends out is that I can usually search my email for what I'm looking for.

The search function in Jira has always been unusable. It’s perhaps the worst part of the entire platform, but nice to see they’re still focused on adding features I will never use.

That’s maybe the reason today to not build more but not the reason it is bad. America ignored rail for decades in favor of highway systems and now the cost is almost always considered infeasible. We will redo our roads every 5-10 years though.

If it was invested in 50 years ago or more we would be in a different place for sure.

I also live in Chicago and wouldn’t mind walking extra to another stop, but Chicago also has a massive traffic problem, particularly post pandemic. During rush hour, the bus is stop and go already.

I’m really curious how this would pan out here, but it can’t be the only solution.

There's a very tiny use-case for web components.

That's weird, we've been using them at my company for a number of years and there's plenty of other examples of them being adopted elsewhere too. This continues to read as, "it's not React, so it's bad."

Web components are a trend? I've been using them for close to 10 years and they're still not anywhere close to mainstream. Loudly as possible? They've quietly just kind of been there for years.

I think we have a generation of developers that only know React and they're so engrained with it they simply cannot imagine a world without it. If you really can't find a use case for web components then you're living in a bubble.

Wow, this is a weird a comment. Who are "they"? You sound like you think there's some giant conspiracy against JS frameworks. Is the Illuminati behind this? I kid, but a browser feature is kind of what it is. It can take years for features to make it into enough browsers to make them usable. It's quite a bit different than the fluidness of a JS framework.

This discussion comes up all the time and I always have the same response: not everyone needs a full-on framework for what they're doing. They also may need to share that code with other teams using other frameworks or even third parties. The post even mentions that web components may not be a good fit for you.

Whatever the propaganda machine wants to be an issue will be an issue. If it wasn’t this it would something else that has no impact on their lives.

The NFL is trying to expand their viewership. It doesn’t matter if NFL fans want to see Bad Bunny, they are already watching.

The problem is your comment is missing really important information. You said you returned in 2017, but only mentioned that it was good in 2005. This leaves a 12 year period where it could have declined. You didn't say it was good in 2005 and you already started to see the decline before you left.

You have no more evidence that it declined before the acquisition than after it. It reads as some weird defense of Bezos and then you doubled down by saying management wasn't happy with employee backlash.

Anyways, I agree that the decline did start before the acquisition, like it started for all newspapers. The Internet killed the newspaper. Bezos was supposed to save it.

It's also the case that The Washington Post brought itself down. I grew up reading WaPo and when I moved back to DC as an adult c. 2017 I got a subscription.

This doesn't really add up given Bezos purchased it in October 2013.

It also probably did not inspire very much good will from management/ownership when the company's employees started regularly leaking proceedings at company meetings and reporters started making a practice of using social media to criticize management during work hours.

Your thinking is completely backwards. This isn't the first case of a wealthy individual buying journalism in order to destroy it. Why do you think employee backlash happened in the first place?

You didn't say "rank-and-file gun rights supporters", you said "right-wingers". These are all MAGA, which today, whether you like it or not, is the majority of "right-wingers". MAGA lives on a lack of principles, and that's why it's popular. Things are getting real now, huh?

That's MAGA, which is the overwhelming majority of the right in the United States.

It's not hard to find examples.

"You cannot bring a firearm loaded with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want. It's that simple."

- Kash Patel

“I don't know of any peaceful protester that shows up with a gun and ammunition rather than a sign."

- Kristi Noem

“With that being said, you can’t have guns. You can’t walk in with guns. You just can’t.”

-Donald Trump

"There’s no vaccine that is, you know, safe and effective."

https://www.factcheck.org/2023/11/scicheck-rfk-jr-incorrectl...

It takes time to build a community. Twitter was not what it was over night, it took time. Before that, it was just "a certain type of person." Mostly pointless crap. You're looking for a specific community but not willing to put in the work to help build it. The point is the tools are there to help build the community but everyone just expects it to happen for them.

That's why it's "lazy". You just want the benefits of the community but not actually build it. At the time Twitter became popular, there was novelty to it to keep it going through the early days. Bluesky doesn't have that advantage, the novelty of this type of platform is gone, it's just expected to be a replacement right away.

And I say this because I've seen other people with actual pull, like Mark Cuban, have similar sentiments. You can drown out all the noise you don't like and help move your followers onto it. It simply needs a larger community. More people means the current majority becomes a minority.

This and the many other opinions on Bluesky are just lazy. There is nothing stopping you from curating the moderation to your wants or even creating your own moderation entirely. There’s nothing stopping you from helping build the community you desire. You just want the work done for you. Stop complaining about it and make it happen.

The tools are there to make it what you want, it is light years ahead of the other platform. Many people have this weird nostalgia about a Twitter that never existed anywhere but in their imagination.

I haven't seen a convincing argument about why it would have been better if he remained in power.

You're way off base here. No one is arguing that he should be in power. It's the way it was done. You're also ignoring a very important question: now what?

Sorry, but the last year has not inspired confidence that this administration knows what it's doing.

Dictators will go to sleep just slightly more terrified tomorrow night.

And Putin?

Mark another instance of ignoring the US Constitution down. Sounds a bit like America has their very own dictator.

Two examples of military intervention / occupation working out in the long run are Germany and Japan in WW2. Maybe even South Korea (stabilization of a dictatorship and economic development lead to a democratic revolution later). One can be hopeful that this starts a better chapter for the Venezuelians as well.

Ignoring the fact that we have been using these examples for decades now as reasoning for going to war, these were all done after years of war. What makes you so convinced that this is "over" and the Venezuelean people can live happily ever after? History says it's far from over.

It has become political (toward the left)

I don’t feel this way at all. Maybe it’s one of the only places you’re actually consuming mixed opinions.

Then who cares if your site is down for a few hours once in a blue moon because the auxiliary service in front of it is down?

I'm talking about physically blowing a whistle. The parent comment implied that supplying whistles was somehow aiding and abetting criminals.

She worked at the school and, according to her attorney, had a legal work permit. [1]

She was running from masked agents who are racially profiling people, detaining them (including US citizens), and then treating them like animals until they sign papers out of the country. They moved her out of state already to make it more difficult for her attorney. This is common practice.

"It's easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled."

[1] https://www.chicagotribune.com/2025/11/07/attorney-day-care-...