Kbin is pretty new, no apps, and faced a lot of issues during the wave of incoming redditors. Some lemmy instances did, too, but there were more of them so there were alternatives when one crashed. If we compare kbin.social to a big instance like lemmy.world, it’s not doing too bad.
Tildes is invite-only so I don’t think they wanted to grow that quickly in the first place.
I guess you’re right. Even some lemmy instances had to close registration. Ahhh so kbin is newer. I guess that explains a lot too.
Also took a quick look at tildes and it’s text only, as far as I know. So if they change their mind about registrations, not a lot of people will join anyway.
Don’t quote me on this, but I’ve read lemmy is a few years old already while kbin is just a few months old (3-4 mos?). Add the number of instances (i only know of 3 kbin instances) and you can see why it didn’t take off the way lemmy did.
I agree. Purely text-based sites need a certain kind of audience/users. I love a good discussion/debate, but I need my memes, too. Lol.
In fairness, despite its age, kbin feels like it has more features. I guess the simplicity of lemmy has its draws too, plus its already growing community.
Lol as a visual person, I couldn’t agree more. Images make everything pop. I came from the dial up era and the boom of forums and chat rooms. But even I appreciate good memes and images sprinkled here and there.
The Kbin creator had initially joined to help Lemmy, but decided to create his own thing when he couldn’t take their political alignments anymore. The Lemmy devs used to be vocal Uyghur genocide deniers and pro-North-Korea, and would answer questions on Reddit’s r/AskATankie (a tankie is someone who supports communist dictatorships), but now that Lemmy is successful, they’ve kind of grown hush-hush on it, without really addressing it.
So, he went to create Kbin, but since he’s not a software engineer, he chose foundations that won’t really scale too well. Kbin is written in PHP, which is an interpreted and mono-threaded technology, it’s great at some stuff, but not high-scale services (source: that’s what I do for a living). Lemmy was written in Rust, which is compiled and multi-threaded. It doesn’t mean Lemmy won’t meet tricky scale bottlenecks, but it will give it a much larger toolset to get through whole classes of them.
And of course, Kbin being much younger, it doesn’t currently have a bunch of critical stuff that Lemmy already has. For instance: an API, which has been allowing other people to build great native clients for it.
This is interesting. Thank you for the info. Quick question, though: does this mean kbin will inevitably face scaling issues when it gets too big? And there’s no way to prevent that?
My best answer is: if they get to sufficient scale, both Lemmy and Kbin will face scaling issues to get through, but Lemmy is based on something that will make it much easier for humans to get through a lot of those bottlenecks.
I hope what this answer conveys is that the technology choice is a major factor, but not the only factor. If the Lemmy dev team doesn’t know how to scale a service, and don’t enlist the help of people who do, the underlying technology won’t make much of a difference. But it does give them a very strong upside.
Another Lemmy user was saying that the Kbin move to use PHP was like someone saying: “oh, I like the airplane you just built by yourself with the intention to fly above the clouds, I’m going to do the same thing, let me prepare my cardboard”, and there’s a lot of truth to it. 😉
That analogy really drives the point home. Basically, lemmy already has a built-in advantage due to the tech they went with. But like any program/machine, it’s only as good as the people behind it. Thank you for the answer.
Without an API, all clients would need to rely on scraping, which is slower and more resource intense - almost orders of magnitude. Until Kbin develops an API, it will always be less used.
There’s also the issue that during the first big influx, Kbin turned off federation while the dev tried to fix things up. It was off for days, so any fledgling magazines there couldn’t take advantage of Lemmy traffic, we couldn’t sub to them and made our own communities instead, and by the time they turned federation back on a lot of Lemmy communities were already pretty established as “the main one”.
You are correct about Tildes. They are very intentionally cultivating a different atmosphere and don’t want Reddit’s huddled masses. There is a subset of reddit users who fit there but it’s not the shitposting crowd.
He later disowned one of his granddaughters because she got interviewed by another rich kid that was making a documentary exposing how they talk about poor people behind closed doors. It’s available on YouTube, but I forgot the name. The producer of the documentary went back and interviewed her again, after WB disowned her.
He may have said he was putting a spotlight on the issue for PR. He was actually bragging, and shoving it in our face, given what he did to his granddaughter who actually did try to shine a spotlight on the issue.
Found it! It’s called The One Percent, by Jaime Johnson.
Actually long desks are no longer considered best practice. At my work, some devs have a lazy suzan, while others prefer a circle that they can pivot around to face the right computer.
I got one of those desks with a vertical pneumatic lift so I can stack the computers vertically in a rack and just raise/lower it so the right one is at eye height
The trick is you hire a runner who comes over when you ring a bell and he unplugs your computer and plugs in the one you need and then takes the other computer to someone else that needs it, I think they call him a vm short for vamoose machine
At one point, before we virtualised everything, I had a custom desk built in an L-shape. Instead of a desk and a return, I had the refurbishment team put together a desk with two desks instead. It gave me two sets of drawers, two computer cubby holes and the gap was too small for the horrible keyboard adjustable shelf that kept hitting your knees, so they replaced it with a fixed surface instead.
People laughed.
Colleagues sniggered.
Then they wanted one too.
Now I have a mobile lectern with an iMac clamped to it. Height adjustable, wheels, enough space for keyboard, trackpad and USB hub. I move around my office as the mood or light takes me.
I swear, overcoming fixed functional-ness is like a superpower when you can apply it.
I once shared a small office with a co-worker. I had the idea to move the desks away from the walls and place them back-to-back, diagonally, in the middle of the room. Other co-workers scoffed and remarked at how dumb and unconventional this looked. Then I explained that we each now had nearly full privacy from each other, much more personal space in our respective corners, no more glare from the window, and nobody could sneak up on us from the door anymore. Things got pretty quiet after that.
Because precise dates are used much more commonly contemporaneously than they are for historical purposes. This is so true that the year is commonly omitted, as it is assumed and understood by all parties without mention.
You don’t need the comma when you write it this way. The comma in June 12, 2024, is there exactly because it’s the wrong order.
It’s basically “I wrote the date. Oops, forgot the year!”
Computers order it correctly in that format because that’s the correct format. In the same way a computer will order any other correctly formatted numbers in the correct order - and incorrectly formatted numbers in the incorrect order - it shouldn’t be surprising that they order correctly formatted dates in the correct order.
I figure it’s because the year can be seen as an optional appendage if you’re talking about dates from the current year. Like, I can say “that happened on May 5th,” or “I’ll be there June 18th,” and you can reasonably assume I mean in 2024 unless I specify “June 18th, 2063.”
Now, as for why you can say “I’m going on the 18th,” but Americans don’t say 18th of June, 2024, I haven’t a clue. We really only seem to have logical explanations for the way we do things about half of the time.
Probably because PPAs only work on Ubuntu and there are more Linux distros and even then it meant having to build and test a package for a couple of different Ubuntu versions.
Theoretically they can, in practice it’s less than ideal. And that doesn’t solve all the other distros or the combinatory explosion of supporting several distros and versions.
Flatpaks on the other hand give you a single runtime of your choice to worry about (though they still have lots of cons too).
Oh I’m not defending PPAs at all, I’m glad we’ve moved past them, I just thought it was a Debian tech that got boosted by Ubuntu. I see I was in error. Thanks for clarifying!
Encouraging something and disabling something are two different things. They have Flatpak in stable, which is untested software. That’s not why they didn’t use PPAs.
There is stuff in there that’s not found anywhere else. For example while researching driverless printing recently I found a huge page on the Debian Wiki but the Arch wiki only has a paragraph saying supporting printers should be detected automatically.
The Debian wiki is awsome. But it’s less noob friendly than Arch wiki.
The web UI looks like an old forum from 2000. Don’t get me wrong, a well written manpage style webpage is way better than an eye candy bloated scripted webpage (IMO) and I really like how detailed the Debian wiki is. But in today’s “mental standards”, the Debian wiki is not attractive enough for most new comer.
Also, It seems the Debian wiki is not as indexed as Arch wiki on the web.
Finally… I can’t access their wiki with my VPN ! :/.
But I do agree, The Debian wiki is a gold mine !!!
@EveryMuffinIsNowEncrypted@bogpunk While I agree with your intent here I feel it should be pointed out that if people stopped fucking them, they'd quickly see the error of their ways.
Yeah, Near was a genius, too. They invented the MSU-1 virtual expansion “chip” for the SNES, which allows for CD audio and video on SNES games (and with an appropriate flashcard, it can interface with and run on actual SNES hardware).
That the emulator behaves exactly as genuine hardware does.
For one, there are sometimes hardware quirks in consoles that are used to implement features. Like the video screens along the track in Mario Kart 64, the N64 has shared memory between the CPU and GPU, which they used to generate that effect. It’s difficult to replicate that behavior in an emulator.
Then there’s lag. You might argue that an emulator can provide a better experience by obliterating lag via brute force, but that wouldn’t be the authentic experience the real hardware would provide.
Or a simple one I’ve noticed with SNES emulators: None of them get the sound quite right. It’s hard to explain, there’s a high pitched “rattle” that isn’t present on a genuine SNES, it’s almost like any emulation is too perfect and isn’t sanding down a rough edge the original hardware did?
Most closely matches the behavior of actual SNES consoles.
This requires very careful emulation of the timings of the various buses and co-processors, as well as on-cart chips which may or may not be present. For instance, a Speedy Gonzales game has a button in the final stage which crashes almost every emulator because enters an infinite loop reading from an open bus and waiting for the value to attain a specific pattern. However reading from an open bus is generally specified to be the last value loaded into the bus, which in this case is the load instruction itself, $18. So the value is read to be $1818 by most emulators, which doesn’t match the pattern expected.
However, this is only if you’re emulating with instruction level accuracy. It is possible for the value of the bus to change in between the instruction being loaded and the value of the bus being loaded due to an HDMA load being triggered, but this requires a cycle accurate emulator.
Lemmygrad and Hexbear aren’t “leftist” in the confused sense that Americans usually mean “leftist.” They’re actually leftist in the original sense, meaning that they want to abolish private ownership of the means of production. To the extent they’re “widely hated,” it’s largely because the Anglosphere has been indoctrinated against real, actual socialism their entire lives.
More often than not, when Americans say leftist they really mean left-liberalism a la Bernie Sanders, which is really center-left at most, and not actually leftist in the original sense, a sense which Americans have forgotten thanks to two Red Scares and the first Cold War.
Totalitarian is an invented term, and every single government and governance structure is “authoritarian” by definition. These words mean hubris, and are dogwhistles for anti-communists.
If Leninists are not leftists according to you, you might as well start to claim Hitler was not a fascist, and Bush, Obama, Clinton, Churchill were all great homies.
Nah, I don’t think I will compromise. Hitler was a totalitarian dictator, and Lenin horseshoed himself all the way around to become the same. None of their American contemporaries then or since are comparable. Waving your hand and saying everything is authoritarian ignores how many people they both killed to maintain that authority, the vast majority being working class. Leninists are not leftists, they are just bloodthirsty pigs.
That’s not the part people have an issue with, the part where their users deny genocides, call everyone that has a less extreme left opinion of politics Nazis, end up being so “anti-racism” that they’re racists themselves and take all critics as personal attacks, that’s what people have an issue with.
There is no need to “deny genocide” which exist only in american propaganda and in your brain that’s been poisoned by it. “The Holodomor”, is a fringe conspiracy theory, just like the US media chauvinistic campaign about the Uighurs in China. No one takes either the first or second seriously outside the US. Not to mention it’s anti-communism used to reinforce the dictate of the ruling class over society. And by supporting these conspiracy theories, this anti-communism, you are literally speaking out against the working class.
So, uh, yeah. The lemmygrad guys are right. You’re a fascist, dearie.
Well, yours lack of elementary logic and exposure to propaganda, it’s the level of /r/shitliberalsay or the like. The burden of proof is on the assertor. Neither the American propaganda nor the fools fooled by it have proved any genocide, but they are already accusing us of denying it. A typical mind manipulation tactic where a thesis is taken as immutable truth without any basis for it.
The “Uyghur genocide” is bullshit Atlanticist propaganda, and English-language Wikipedia is basically NATOpedia in its slant on the topic, so yes we will deny it. It’s a product of the new Cold War propaganda campaign against China.
I get why people would believe it like a decade ago when the facts were still kind of up in the air, but now even west media is like “yeaaah we looked into it and all of it is complete and utter bullshit” and yet you still have people confidently going on like it’s still a thing.
Eventually you have to come to the grips with the fact that the only reason you believe in the Uyghur genocide is because you’re racist.
Marx was the third ever sociologist, the first being Weber and the second I always forget his name. But this is historically attested to, it’s not something I just pulled out of my ass lol
Yes, Marxism is based on a scientific methodology called historical materialism. It’s too complex to be explained in a single comment, but it has an internal logic and methodology which proposes to analyze social systems in general, but especially capitalist societies in particular.
You can’t use the scientific method used in the natural sciences because you can’t put a society in a lab to study it. Social sciences require a methodology apart from the natural sciences, and Marxism has proposed historical materialism, which is very consistent and coherent approach, based on the Hegelian dialectical logic with materialism as a principle.
How ironic! Let’s see if it fits for the “genocide” position:
Closed Ideological Systems: Whether those who defend the idea of “genocide” in Xinjiang are aware or not, the sources used to claim there is a genocide in Xinjiang is usually Adrian Zenz, a German white supremacist and Christian fundamentalist who claimed in his book Worthy to Escape that “other belief systems are ultimately inspired by Satan” and justifies “eternal punishment” for those who refuse to believe in Jesus.
Immunity to Facts: Every time one tries to argue that Xinjiang faced a policy of de-radicalization of terrorists who led many attacks against the province, those who claim there is a genocide there say they are “genocide deniers.” I’ve even seen people saying those who don’t agree with the “genocide” position are paid by the Chinese.
Enemy Construction: I can’t even count the number of times people have called those who don’t promote the “genocide” propaganda “tankies” and dismissing them instead of engaging with arguments.
Adaptability: The “genocide” propaganda claims there is a genocide there, and then when presented with the fact that even those who were put in the re-education facilities were allowed to express their culture with dances and art on video, the “genocide” conspiracy theorists say that it was a fake, an act, that it was a spectacle organized by the Chinese to hide the genocide. Just to give you an example.
It does match the “genocide” position very well. I’ve yet to see a genocide which preserves the language, the culture, the customs and the places of worship of a people. Another thing, notice the reaction of Muslim countries to the actual genocide being perpetrated by Israel. They are firmly condemning it through all channels. In contrast, the policies of de-radicalization by the Chinese were unanimously well-received by Muslim countries.
Another thing, notice the reaction of Muslim countries to the actual genocide being perpetrated by Israel. They are firmly condemning it through all channels. In contrast, the policies of de-radicalization by the Chinese were unanimously well-received by Muslim countries.
Very generous of you to assume that many of these folk believe Muslims and Arabs are human beings capable of forming their own opinions and international policy. The opinions of actual Muslims are similarly handwaved akin to any communist’s opinion.
These states’ international defense of China’s de-radicalization program is stated to merely be because they are money-hungry opportunists, buddying up with China while ignoring a politically and economically inconvenient genocide. 🙄 How… adaptable this narrative is.
The seemingly unending wave of videos of Uyghurs in China recording themselves in their homes and making it clear they are not undergoing genocide have to be ignored. In fact, they have to be deleted by the platforms hosting them. How utterly immune to facts this narrative is.
If these countries care about Palestine, oh… I don’t know. Russia is making them care. Iran, maybe? Maybe North Korea or China are forcing these Muslims to hate Israel. Who else are we being directed to hate right now? Afghanistan? Just throw a dart at the “Axis of Evil” board and pick an “uncivilized” nation. It’s their fault. Why not?
Atlanticist crackers are exactly why I’m a third-worldist; I genuinely care more about my community’s diaspora than I’d ever care about these genocidal neocolonist crackers
If you are referring to the Xinjiang issue, then it just reaffirms what @davel just said:
it’s largely because the Anglosphere has been indoctrinated against real, actual socialism their entire lives
Because the “Uyghur genocide” in Xinjiang is another example of propaganda. Or do you really think the West cares about Muslims and want to protect their “freedom”?
call everyone that has a less extreme left opinion of politics Nazis
I don’t see anyone in Lemmygrad calling other people “Nazis” because they disagree with someone in a discussion. I usually see them criticizing others as “liberals.” This is either a misrepresentation of leftists in general, very common among conservatives, or you are frequently being called a Nazi. I don’t know, maybe that’s on you? 🤔
end up being so “anti-racism” that they’re racists themselves and take all critics as personal attacks
That’s so specific you should give at least one example of this. We have very strict moderation against any bigotry, so I challenge you to link any “racist” attitude or comment you have seen in Lemmygrad. I will give you 24 hours, and if you don’t reply with an example, I will edit this comment saying you chickened out.
If “the west” isn’t voting for Bush or Reagan then they’re hailing people like Obama, who destroyed Libya and brought back open air slave markets - or Clinton who destroyed Belgrade and undermined social protections for workers. To think you are somehow better because you support(ed?) Genocide Joe is just delusion.
I hadn’t done that much research into it, but I’d figured most of them were. Of course the ICC’s just a Western white body to keep the mother continent under the settlers’ thumb.
Critical support to Donald Trump in his mission to undermine the amerikkkan state, bless him for not hiring people to the state department and congratulations for his negotiation of capitulation to the Taliban
North Atlantic imperialist countries is what we refer as “the West”. They have shared interests and in terms of foreign policy act almost in unison, so much so that a single term to describe North American and Western European countries is not a generalization, it’s quite appropriate actually.
Don’t act Reagan-adjacent and you won’t get pilloried for it. Considering you wanna throw around allegations of genocide denial with zero investigation and zero evidence, you sound less Reagan and a lot more Bush-- and subsequently deserve no right to serious speech.
end up being so “anti-racism” that they’re racists themselves
anyone complaining about “reverse racism” or “anti white racism” is a complete joke. like boo fucking hoo, someone called you a cracker on the internet, get over it.
they replied confirming to me that what they were complaining about was in fact racism against white people, given that it seems to be a pretty common bit on lemmygrad to call people crackers and compare them to that kid who went onto fox news to complain about his face being photoshopped onto a picture of a ritz cracker by left wing students at his university that seems to be what they were complaining about
Racism has a definition that’s fairly easy to understand and yes people of all colors can be victims and even people of the same skin colour can be racists against one another because racism isn’t necessarily about the color of your skin, it can be about your ethnicity.
Racism:
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.
Ethnicity:
the quality or fact of belonging to a population group or subgroup made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent.
If you had taken a crowd of anonymous Germans all dressed the same in 1935, how would you have told who was a Jew and who wasn’t? You wouldn’t have been able to because they were all just white people.
What do you call it when 100 years ago in a first world white country the population that speaks one official language has an infant mortality rate comparable to that of colonial Africa while the population that speaks the other official language and lives in the same cities has an infant mortality rate comparable to any other first world nation?
Was the Rwanda genocide not racism because it was two groups with the same skin colour? What about what happened in Yugoslavia?
My white friend who went to China to study had to sit through multiple explanations by many Chinese student of the levels of intelligence being affected by skin colour and ethnicity and guess what, whites weren’t at the top! “All white people are dumber than Indians who are dumber than Koreans who are dumber than Chinese.” Are you telling me that isn’t racism against white people (and anyone that isn’t Chinese)? Because I sure would hope someone would call me a racist if I was saying the same thing about people of another skin colour or ethnicity!
Racism is not easy to understand and you’re definitely not going to get a clear understanding of it from reading a definition especially if you’re white. I suggest you read some books. Good heavens maybe your racist Chinese friend is right.
you see i have pulled out the dictionary definition of racism and also an annecdote about how a country colonized by white people for centuries can actually be racist against my white friend for calling him a ‘cracker’, defeating your arguement
Racism against white people would be a problem if white people were not the perpetrators of racism against the entire world for centuries, whilst looting and genociding and dehumanising other races. Except the fact that they have and do it in unison and cheerfully, in the name of “white man’s burden” bullshit. And people like you defend it and carry water for them.
You know which country “inspired” and taught racial segregation policies to Hitler? USA. The country that defected Europeans colonised by genociding Native American indigenous people. I swear this whole shit has to be some kind of grand project, because Albert Pike (most famous Freemason leader) spoke of 3 world wars that West invents, 2 of which have been exactly invented the way he described, and he uses terms like Nazism, a term or ideology which did not even exist in 1891.
So you’re saying that what the Jews were victim of during WW2 wasn’t racism? Because they certainly were white!
How about the Irish? The deportation of Acadians? French Canadians seeing their language becoming illegal to teach in Manitoba? The Yugoslav wars?
By your logic it’s also impossible to be racist towards Chinese and Japanese because man, let me tell you, they can be racist as fuck towards everyone else and they were the ones in power on their side of the world for centuries!
Racism has a definition and it’s a bad thing no matter who the victim is.
It’s funny how it’s always the same whenever you’re confronted to arguments. You just insult the other party and leave the scene like you were a hero.
Also very funny you should call me a cracker when you don’t know what’s my origin, you just assume I’m white because you would be unable to accept that someone not white could realize that racism goes all ways.
European Jews were not considered white before and during WW2. Whiteness has always changed with whatever we needed it to be for political reasons. The Irish were not considered white. In South Africa during Apartheid, a Japanese national was forbidden by a bus driver from entering a whites-only bus because the driver thought he was Chinese. The man sued and won against the driver as the Japanese were considered white and allowed to board segregated buses.
That’s a liberal with no framework. No one denies genocides (pro-tip just because the western media says it’s a genocide doesn’t make it a genocide.) Being so anti-racist you are the real racist is the Liberal Democratic party who elected a hard-core segregationist as president, not a Marxist Leninist. No one except people like you give a fuck about personal attacks. lol.
Wild how much footage is coming out of Gaza right now showing an actual ongoing genocide, yet Zionists and their water-carriers will harp on and on about how Israel is merely defending itself.
Nothing of the sort from Xinjiang. At all.
I’d like to see ONE verifiable image or video depicting this supposed Uyghur genocide we’re denying. ONE. Apparently it’s one of the worst human atrocities occuring right now. One of the worst in HISTORY.
So… show me a single picture. Fetish porn doesn’t count. Where are the dead bodies? Where are these supposed mass graves?
Love to break it to ya, they don’t fucking exist and they never did. You’ve been lied to.
Israel has killed more civilians (mostly children and women) in a month of war than Russia has killed in almost two years. The Russians actually target almost exclusively military infrastructure, they have preserved electrical grids, water stations, communications infrastructure, etc… Not because they are “good guys”, obviously, but it’s a part of their strategy. But it shows genocide is not a part of this strategy.
Written by Timofei Sergeitsev in RIA Novosti, the rhetoric in the editorial…
Oh so it’s not a “Kremlin paper”, it’s just what some guy thinks. If there are “no more Nazis in Ukraine than anywhere else” then there are no more nazis in Russia than anywhere else 🙃
The article was written by Timofei Sergeitsev, a Russian “philosopher” with no direct link to the government. The article in the website you linked was written in early April 2022, very early after the war, when no one knew what to expect. It was claimed it was “proof” the Russians was intending to genocide Ukrainians.
More than a year later, have we seen anything like it? Have we seen active actions from the Russians to consistently destroy civilian buildings and systematically cause civilian casualties on purpose? I at least haven’t, unless we are talking about a completely different war which I’m not aware. I don’t excuse the Russians of anything, I’m sticking with the facts. The Russians have been very careful not to cause non-military casualties, which is extremely odd for a genocidal regime.
So, in short, it’s your article written by a guy with no links to the government vs. what the actual war itself shows in practice. I prefer to see what practice shows us.
Feels like ad hominem. The point is that you are unwilling to even engage with the idea that Russia seeks to eliminate Ukrainian identity, an idea which is reported by a number of primary Russian sources in a variety of media. Putin himself expresses frequent open skepticism of Ukrainian nationality. Not to even mention the internationally recognized mass deportation of children.
I won’t argue that Israel isn’t an apartheid state engaging in collective punishment. Meanwhile you will turn yourself in circles to defend Russian aggression, and for the life of me I can figure out what that has to do with liberating workers. It just feels less like intellectual honesty and more like campism. But then somehow I’m the brainwashed goon for actually attempting to maintain something resembling ideological consistency.
unwilling to even engage with the idea that Russia seeks to eliminate Ukrainian identity
Camarada Forte did engage with this argument. The person who created this supposed dossier dictating Russia’s desire to destroy the Ukrainian identity has no direct link to the Russian government.
You need evidence we can engage with. We cannot meaningfully engage with empty platitudes.
Meanwhile you will turn yourself in circles to defend Russian aggression
Do you know what was going on in eastern Ukraine, beginning in 2014? Pretty similar to what’s going on in Gaza right now. Hint: it was not Russian artillery leveling homes, schools, and hospitals.
But then somehow I’m the brainwashed goon for actually attempting to maintain something resembling ideological consistency.
Awfully defensive there, bud. Speaking of ad hominem. 🙄
The point is that you are unwilling to even engage with the idea that Russia seeks to eliminate Ukrainian identity
Is that like a litmus test? Next time I’m ordering pizza I’ll ask the restaurant if they are willing to engage with the idea that Russia seeks to eliminate Ukrainian identity.
Literally no idea why you brought that up again lol
The point is that you are unwilling to even engage with the idea that Russia seeks to eliminate Ukrainian identity, an idea which is reported by a number of primary Russian sources in a variety of media. Putin himself expresses
To be fair, inside the Russia itself some Putin’s words about Ukrainian history are criticized. Therefore, I would not speak for all of Russia. Most of the russian people have an extremely negative attitude towards the Ukrainian right-wing radical government and a positive attitude towards the ukrainian people. And the media is not trying to change these opinions with the exception of a few of the dumbest loudmouths. So your words about genocide are nonsense.
The US state department lawyers and the British House of Lords have evidence. That’s why they’re pursuing convictions of the Chinese leaders involved. No, wait— sorry, I misremembered. They both concluded there is insufficient evidence.
As is tradition! What’s funny is that they’re supposed to be defederated from my instance so I don’t know why they even see my comments… Their admin even called my instance “sh.itsfullof.nazis” in their defederation message because they were angry that they were confronted to people who disagreed with them when they brigaded our administration communities…
I believe it says far more about your own reading comprehension skills if you can’t tell us - human beings sick and tired of Empire apologia - apart from the usually incomprehensible shit salad that language models currently like to present as coherent.
Maybe if you actually read more, you’d be able to discern the difference. 🤷♂️
I understand. You refuse to accept something that is fairly obvious for many Lemmy users and want to put a burden of proof on me, and because I don’t want to take on additional work for someone I neither know nor agree with, you are happy to keep your opinion, as am I to keep mine.
For me, an under-the-sink trash can that hands on the cabinet door has been a huge QoL improvement.
A back scratcher.
Much more situational, but our back gate has a padlock that was originally different from our house keys. Kwikset actually sells “programmable” padlocks so now it is the same key as our front door, which makes life a tad easier.
A computer mouse that fits my hands.
Enough phone and laptop chargers to not have to constantly go to another room to grab one.
I started working on my generic grunt in my 30s and use it for all kinds of things: getting out of chairs, into chairs, picking something up off the floor, the first stair up or down, lifting anything with both hands, etc.
As time goes on I’m developing specialized grunts like a go slightly deeper on the first step down a flight of stairs than up.
What’s the current recommendation for those? Is it still Anker?
Also be sure to get a medium length one. It’s so much nicer having a 6’ cable, or 10’ if you want to get crazy with it. It makes traveling and transit much nicer (ex. University students working on campus), and it might be nice for home so you can roll all over your bed while on your phone
I’ve heard good things about Nomad Goods. I have some of their other accessories for iPhone and watch, and it’s the best quality stuff I’ve ever found. I can’t personally recommend the USB-C cables or wall adapters, but I plan to get some soon. I have a leather case, MagSafe mount stand, and a few watch bands. All are incredible, but pricey.
I do have some Anker cables and they’re perfectly fine. Much better than others I’ve tried, including Apple shit. Anker also makes some nice outlet extension/USB adapter combos that are super convenient.
If you want a fancy coiled cable, try Ventec edit: Ventev. It’s amazing for the car - keeps it off the floor.
CableMatters is my go-to when I need something I can’t find above, like a USB extension cable or high-speed HDMI. They don’t feel as premium and are a bit stiff, but they’re reliable, and they just seem to make every option you can think of.
Personally, I don’t buy Anker products since the eufy scandal, but their chargers are still top notch so I am sure you won’t have much to complain about.
I use Ugreen right now and am satisfied. I don’t have the equipment to measure efficiency, so I can’t comment on how good it is.
They sold these cameras claiming it does not use any cloud service, but that was a lie. They produced unencrypted streams and lied about it. They lied so much that it proves they are not trustworthy as a company, and why I personally won’t be buying any Anker products for a long time. They apologized and what I took from this is “we are sorry we got caught”.
Their charging department is probably not the same ones, but still, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Pretty much all locks are re-keyable. Kwikset’s “smart key” system is different only in that you don’t have to buy new pins and take the lock apart to do it.
(I’m switching from Kwikset to commercial-grade Schlage because I wanted to upgrade the durability of my interior locks and wanted the exterior ones to match, so I’m about to find out how much more difficult normal re-keying is. Wish me luck!)
Normal rekeying is pretty easy, if you’re careful - push out the core (the “follower” will hold your spring pins in place), dump out the old key pins, swap to the new key, and put in the new key pins, replace the core. Even when I’ve completely screwed it up (pushed the follower too far so the springs came out, mixed all the key pins together so I had to work out which was which, and more) it’s not been more than a 10-minute job.
Washes your bum after using the toilet. Saves toilet paper. Gets your rear cleaner. This is a great suggestion. No power needed, just hooks right into the plumbing. I have this one . Bio Bidet Bidet Attachment for Toilet, White, Non Electric
Loans aren’t the problem. Insane loan debt is a symptom of an unsustainable higher education system.
You can learn a lot on your own, but many careers require a formal education (medicine, law, engineering, etc.). By itself, banning student loans within our current system merely makes it harder for poorer people to attain those careers.
On the flip side, consider this. If few can afford university, then the universities will have a reduced income and they’ll be forced to adapt by shrinking and lowering tuition rates. Cheaper institutions will end up with a competitive advantage. This could ironically make degrees more affordable.
A. That would only be true in a culture where employers don’t think you need a degree for basic jobs. From what I’ve seen, the US isn’t like that.
B. Even if people are practically able to turn down uni, all the universities will most likely agree to keep prices high, similar to what landlords do. If all of them keep their prices high, then all of them get more money.
If no one could get a degree, employers would have to change their requirements to reflect this. Otherwise they won’t be able to find any employees.
Universities need to have their classrooms filled to stay in business. If attendance plummets, then they will be forced to adapt by reducing tuition prices and reducing expenses, i.e. providing less amenities.
They wouldn’t change the requirements. We see it now. When a company can’t find “qualified” candidates, they outsource it to international contractors.
It cost 70k to get my degree. Any idea how much tuition would have had to be for someone living out of a trailer to be able to afford it? If your answer was zero dollars you are correct.
Education is how people get out of poverty op. The issue is that the US has a dog eat dog fuck the poor mentality that keeps the ladders out of poverty out of reach then blames them for their situation. The only thing that should determine whether you get into college should be your capability to do the work or not. Not what is or is not in your bank account.
The actual solution is to make college free given academic benchmarks are hit and institute mechanisms to keep costs under control that go beyond “how can we maximize profit?”
I was low income. This idea that the poor have enough aid is so divorced from reality. But youre right, the academic requirements probably should be weighted according to demographic because the rich are so heavily showered with resources by their parents. But youre wrong about free college benefitting them more than the poor.
I started college in 2005, had to leave because things happened in my life halfway through then finished my degree in 2020. So I have an idea of what it was like over the last 15-20 years as I worked on my degree. But by all means continue telling me what it is like to go through something you have never experienced yourself.
We can lower all of these costs by shrinking the university. Fewer buildings, fewer utilities, fewer classrooms. Not to mention the many extraneous amenities that don’t directly relate to coursework.
What about online university? Then you don’t even need a building and students don’t need to travel to the campus.
You're talking about changes that will take a generation or more to settle. While these things are in flux, professors will lose their jobs, research grants and budgets will be gutted, and educational assets will be liquidized (imagine museums being sold off to private collections - this is incredibly damaging to the collective knowledge base). Meanwhile, the generations that wait for prices to come down will be left having to educate themselves on the internet, which not everyone has the motivational drive to do or the ability to spot which sources are providing reliable, accurate material they can learn from.
I get that something's gotta give, but banning loans altogether ain't it unless your entire goal is to turn Gen A's moniker into Ass-Backwards.
Yes, I acknowledge that this would be a shock to society in the short term. But do we really want to maintain the current status quo?
When I wrote Internet, I don’t necessarily mean people will have to teach everything to themselves. I mean services like online classes which offer similar curriculums to a university course.
But do we really want to maintain the current status quo?
I think if you read my comment again, you'd find I acknowledge things need to change, I just think your proposed solution is bad.
I can imagine ways to accomplish these goals more gradually, with less complete and utter destruction, but I don't think someone who proposed something so extreme from the word go really wants to discuss the moderate stance, so I'll leave it with you as a thought exercise.
If you think the professors that will be left will be the highest quality instead of the longest tenured, you're being willfully ignorant. And that loss will ripple down through every generation those passionate and skilled educators would have taught. Plus, "the olds" or whatever have families (which include young people) that would be suffering even more directly to boot.
E: I see we're doing the whole "disregard the overall point and only snark about the lowest hanging fruit you can intentionally take out of context" thing. Into the void with you, redditor.
Your also skipping the dual function of universities as research institutions.
What you’re describing is a community college. Which are fine, and do a great job. But they don’t excel at giving deep specialized knowledge, or advancing the frontiers of human knowledge.
They’re just not equipped with the staff or materials.
Reworking the foundation of how we do advanced education and research in our society seems quite a bit more work than making a program where the taxpayers just pay for qualifying people to get as much education as they want.
That’s a good point, research would be affected. However it’s worth mentioning that the US government already subsidises research, which might cushion the impact.
Not all degrees can be done in a classroom with a projector
Context.
I am a non traditional student, who has spent a significant amount of time working between highschool and college. The degree is about $18k/year for tuition. My STEM degree has a track record of 100% job placement, in your degree field, within one year of graduation. and, with a BS, average starting salary is approaching $80k.
With average rent and stuff, lets call it about $25k/year for the degree. Maybe $30k.
Is there stuff that the university is spending money on that they shouldn’t? Yes. But, we also have many millions of dollars in equipment, some for undergrad, and some for graduated program use. All that equipment/lab spaces takes up space, and that equipment, our professors, and the reputation of our graduates are what makes the companies want to hire from pur school. We’re not even that big of a school, but we have a large reputation for academics.
If you started cutting funding and forcing downsizing, you’re losing decades of experience im teaching, many hundreds of millions in labs and equipment, and reducing the quality of the education that can be offered.
Now, I will grant you that some schools are too expensive, or degrees aren’t worth the cost. And yes, changes in student loan structures are needed, but blanket statements, like that loans should be made illegal, is painting the issue with too broad of a brush stroke. What about making student loans able to be discharged in bankruptcy, and not being federally guaranteed? That could create an environment where loan companies are denying loans based on the cost vs income potential of the degree. Even with that though, we want to be very careful that it is structured in a way that is not going to disenfranchise low income students or minorities. Some degrees will either disappear, or get a lot cheaper. If you can’t get a loan for a $400k underwater basket weaving degree, then it will either go away, or get cheaper.
A lot of programs need space and equipment to effectively produce a good product. You don’t want to throw the baby out with the bath water.
Yea, the education must get cheaper. A lot. But the lever to do that is a cost adjustment for the education, not artificially lowering demand by discriminating against the poor even more.
This only works if the product isn’t in demand. Degrees are in high demand - jobs require them, better jobs require multiple and higher prestige degrees. That isn’t going to change.
Instead those rich enough would still get a degree, but middle and lower classes would be cut out. In the end it would create a wider gap between the classes.
We could go back to government guaranteed loans based on financial circumstances. And we could go back to tuition rates that were compatible with working your way through college. That system worked pretty well. It did drop some students through the cracks because their families were too wealthy for them to qualify and they couldn’t or wouldn’t work their way to tuition, but it seems like it did a lot less damage than the current system.
Student loans seem to be a massive part of the problem of out of control tuition increases. The National Bureau of Economic Research published this study in 2016 that showed that changes to the Federal Student Loan Program accounted for the majority of the 106% increase in tuition between 1987 and 2010. Whether that’s some right-wing scheme to divert attention from reduction of states’ funding of public universities I haven’t looked into, but it seems to me that it’s at least a significant factor on its face.
I think you need to let go of this idea that the big bang happened at a specific location or that we are moving away from or towards a point in space. There is no specific point from which all points in space are departing. Instead, every point in space is moving away from every other.
Consider the following!
Point at any object. That object is at some distance away from you in space which is also a distance away from you in time. For example, an object one light year away is one year into the past, as perceived by you.
Now, point in any direction. No matter where you point, if you extend the line forever, it intersects with the big bang. There is no place to which you can point, no direction, no infinite line you can draw that doesn’t include the big bang.
I’m going to sound like a total idiot but if our universe was at the center of a giant ultra mega giga large sphere could that give an illusion that every point in space was moving away from another when in fact we could all be eventually falling toward whatever side of the sphere we are closest too?
Well, if the sphere was there all along, yes, it’s possible. Very unlikely, but possible. If the whole universe is moving somewhere, we have no way to detect it. Note that this doesn’t exclude the Big Bang, that still happened even in your scenario.
It’s just one of those unprovable things - like whether there’s a God or whether we live in a Matrix. Unprovable and thus irrelevant.
Think of a balloon. Squish the deflated balloon as where everything was. All of it started at a similar point but then the balloon started expanding and everything is moving away at an accelerated pace from each other
The balloon analogy can lead one astray. Our minds see the middle of the balloon inside and think “Big Bang was there”. But the analogy is only for the surface, and the Big Bang included all the surface, and nothing else.
Here’s another way to think about the location of the big bang.
If we look at the night sky, between the planets and stars, into the darkness we find there’s a faint glow emanating from everywhere. This is the cosmic microwave background, the oldest electromagnetic radiation that has taken the longest possible time to reach us because by this construction you avoided all the other objects in the way. This extends your view of the past to its maximum value: the age of the universe, which is literally all of the available time for photons to travel. Note that this is a simplification because it makes some assumptions about the transparency of the early universe, but it suits us fine.
It’s coming from everywhere because all of those places were there at the big bang. Where was the big bang? It was over there. And also in the opposite direction, there. Because all of those places were here.
The big bang wasn’t inside the universe to push anything. The big bang was the universe.
Think of it like leaves on a puddle. As water(space/dark energy) flows into the puddle. It expands. The leaves don’t. They just spread out over the surface of the puddle unless they are bound together with other leaves via surface tension(gravity).
When you look far away, you’re looking backwards in time. If you look really far away, you look really far back in time. If you look far enough away, you’ll see the big bang.
If you move a thousand light years to your left and do this again, you still see the big bang. Even though your “center” has changed. The big bang is more like a singularity in time than it is in space
So everything in space, every object had to get to where it is via time. It travelled there. Everything can’t be anywhere without time as without time it wouldn’t have been able to move there. Time is a constant graph, and as it moves forward, things move around and as such, space is able to exist. This is why we consider space and time to be linked.
Now consider this: if one was to plot a graph of space and time on an x y axis to track an object, there is a point on the graph where time has to be zero, and as such space has to be zero.
This is the big bang.
It is the beginning of the graph. When time was zero, and as such so was space.
Space did not burst out from a single point that we could find out there in space, as there was no point. everything was still everywhere much like it is now, except everywhere just so happened to be so close to one another to be at the same point on the graph. When time began, it just about instantly expanded out, everywhere in every direction. There is no ‘center’ to this expansion, just like if you blow up a balloon there is no center on the surface of the balloon, it just expands everywhere, and more importantly with time we are able to quantify this.
I think this is hard to visualize with words like “out” being used, because then there must be an “in”, and if you draw everything back “in” you get a Centerpoint, no matter what.
Same with the baloon, because when plated, its going in all directions except for “in”, and in space, objects are zooming past each other, “in” and “out” yet still as expansion movement. (Right? I only kind of understand what you’re explaining while guessing at why it’s not 100% understandable for me.
In fact, anything that expands with a surface is going to be hard to visualize as how space moves because it all has a point it starts from.
A lot of people describe the first moment of the big bang as infinitely small, dense, and hot. These descriptions may approximate that first moment of existence, but they slightly miss the mark because in the very first moment of existence, size, density, and temperature didn’t exist. There was nothing to compare anything else against.
Instead, let’s visualize that moment as infinitely same. Erase all thoughts of violent explosions happening very quickly and instead just imagine a single point of light. Not big, because size requires multiple things. Not small because it encompasses everything. Just one infinite same.
Now, since it’s hard for us to visualize change in an infinite void that is simultaneously nothing and everything, imagine that point of light as a magical tank engine at the front of a never-ending train. And our job as conductors of that train is to get to the caboose at the end.
The train cars could theoretically go in any order, but because we conductors are beings of time who need them to arrive on a schedule, we must visit each car in a precise order. And before we can access a car, we must make it unique by showing it something that has never been seen before.
For the first car, this is easy. We simply show it the tank engine at the front of the train. So, the inside of the first car transforms its interior into a copy of the tank engine it’s attached to.
But when we arrive at the second car, things are more complicated. The cars have already seen the tank engine. So, instead, we show the second car the first car. And the second car transforms into a copy of the first car and the tank engine attached to that. And inside the copy of the first car is another copy of the tank engine.
As you can imagine, the further down we get on this train, the more this starts to get out of hand. Copies of copies of copies abound. The magic train is powerful, but as mortal conductors of time, we worry our own powers may have limits. So, to reduce the burden on ourselves, we take some shortcuts. Instead of trying to visualize increasingly long nested copies of trains inside each new car we visit, we start to conceptualize these copies as amounts, or amplitudes. When we open the door to a new car, all of the amplitudes inside resonate and interact, becoming maybe more abstract than they are in reality. They form spatial dimensions and physical properties, as mediated by fundamental forces.
These aren’t set in stone, but determined by the lens through which we view them. And when we look through specific lenses, we see these forces causing certain repeated amplitudes to intermingle and stabilize to the point that even though all of the train copies are further nested when we step into the next car, we can recognize and identify some of the same structures, just shifted slightly in their spatial relationships since we last witnessed them in the previous car. We call these persistent formations matter. And as their shared spatial relationships cause them to cluster and coalesce, we refer to that as gravity.
While in the early cars, this continuum of space and matter is not impossible to conceptualize, the more cars we travel through, the more apparent it becomes that these increasingly complex objects are becoming more and more isolated from each other. At every scale of amplitude, each nested car is attached to its own tank engine. While these engines can interact with each other virtually, at the end of the day, they are all just virtual copies of the train we are on. It is entirely impossible for any one of these tank engines to travel so far that it reaches the edge of its bounding box. Because that bounding box is just a lens through which we imagine overlapping traits of increasingly many very similar objects. And the more of them we imagine, the more space is required to provide the virtual framework of this lens.
So, when we feel like we are experiencing random events in our small subsection of the universe, those events are not truly random, but instead the result of our precise position in the the universal train we’ve been virtually sliding through for over 13 billion years. The universe has become so large that it contains every possible event that could have happened in this span of time. The events are not random but calculated, and duplicated every moment so that every time we enter a new train car, two copies of our observable universe exist at a distance so far apart it’s impossible to comprehend.
And when we observe celestial objects apparently propelled away from each other at increasing speed, they are not really being pushed or pulled anywhere. It is simply an artifact of trying to keep track of the “same” object in rapidly advancing train cars, while each car doubles in size to contain everything the previous car had, as well as everything new that might emerge from the duplication event. The celestial objects year by year, and indeed ourselves from moment to moment, are never the same thing twice. It’s an illusion brought forth by our brains being born into a cosmic flipbook.
Even something as simple as seeing multicolored pixels on this screen is not real, but the result of virtual “tank engines” moving into the same spatial zones occupied by our retinas, which are themselves constructed of virtual trains of varying size. The reason photons move at a set maximum speed which makes them exempt from experiencing time is because they are all just virtual copies of the real locomotive which is driving the whole train. Every photon in our universe is just a make-believe copy of the very first moment of the big bang. A specter of infinite sameness.
So, objects in our universe aren’t moving apart as much as the space between them is increasing to account for the overhead of a universe with constantly growing entropy and uniqueness. The extra space represents a boundary which limits how far light can travel and affect matter in its realm of influence. If you’re still reading this, somewhere out there, in a part of our universe so far away that light from our known universe will never even remotely reach, there is an opposite you made of antimatter reading the exact same thing as written by an opposite me. But we are only made of matter because of a virtual compression of sameness, so that antiverse may be the exact place where the curvature of the entire universe loops back around and is overlaid upon itself. And the uncertainty of photons may arise from the fact that there are two identical universes overlapped and constantly exchanging probabilities. And this may be the compressive property which allows the fundamental forces to exist in the first place. So, say hi to yourself. You’re the reason you’re here.
Yeah. Been trying to find a non-boring way to visualize the start of the universe for a long time. Most of the time I reach for binary which in retrospect is way less fun than trains 🚂
I saw a really good demonstration of this once, but I can’t seem to find a video of it.
Basically imagine a rubber tube with 4 balls equal distance apart from each other.
–0–0–0–0–
If you stretch the tube from both ends all of the balls move an equal distance apart.
----0----0----0----0----
There is no one ball that is the center or the starting point. However if you focus on one ball while stretching it will seem like the others are moving away from it. But in reality they are all moving away from each other at the same rate.
From my layman’s perspective after having watched probably every space documentary produced for channels like the Space channel and Discovery’s conglomeration, the big bang happened and propelled matter out from the source but now, billions of years later, space is expanding not only from this source but also between everything that was propelled from this initial blast.
If you likened that to the USA, the big bang happened in central Iowa, but things aren’t just expanding from the source in Iowa, cities like LA and San Fran are also expanding away from each other at an accellerated rate. AFAIK, the leading theory is that dark matter is causing the intra-galaxy expansion, but little is known about dark matter and what drives this expansion. This is why it is believed that the universe will die a cold death (where all solar energy burns out) rather than collapsing in on itself since everything is moving away from everything else. At a certain point of expansion, nothing will have a gravitational effect on anything else.
It is dark energy, and not dark matter, that is believed to be causing the accelerating expansion of the universe. Dark matter has the opposite effect - gravitational attraction.
COVID-19. People simply refused to do the absolute minimum to stop the spread of the virus. At least in my community, everyone was still socializing with friends and family (without a mask, of course), going out to eat, taking part in recreational activities with other people. Something as simple as “stay away from other people until we get this under control” was too hard for the American public. It certain changed my view of the people around me.
Actions > Talk. They were telling you their true views. People rarely say the quiet part(their views) out loud so it is valuable to be able to translate their actions into their true views.
When you know how others truly feel, it allows you to decide who is worth listening to. Not to say you shouldn’t listen to people with different views, but instead decide whether they are telling you their beliefs or telling you what they think you want to hear(BSing you) and use that rate how trustworthy they are on the topic.
kbin.life
Top