A big part of Reddit getting to where they are now in size and popularity was that the comment sections got predictable and less fun and informative. I think hoping for better here isn’t judgemental or controlling, it’s part of why we left reddit.
Everyone here is talking about how this reminds them of early reddit and early internet but these low effort comments getting common place are very late stage reddit which is boring.
This won’t allow to slide the card around, it’ll just stick to screen in one place. Better learn how to get the screen off entirely, because this will happen again
Yeah I was thinking the best thing to do it just unscrew it, hold it upside-down and shake it out. You have a point on how would you rig it so it does not happen again.
It sucks but people have to start taking wildfire risk into account when choosing where to live. It’s the same as considering flood risk, earthquake risk, mudslide risk, etc.
Concrete production is one of the big culprits in climate change. But maybe this could be done with rammed earth, sustainably harvested timber, and dry-stone masonry.
Damn, they’re not? These seem like such a good solution to so many housing and environmental problems. I’ve wanted to build one for a while, but I’d want it to be in CA…shame.
yea i think theres a few in palm springs anyway. you would need some exit windows for each bedroom, etc. don’t expect any help from the fire department, as burning tires are toxic etc.
Depends. Since this is security software it probably has a kernel driver component. I think in linux a 3rd party kernel module could do the same. But the community would not accept closed source security software, especially not in the kernel.
My Debian system was bricked when it “upgraded” to systemd.
Required attaching a monitor to a normally headless server to fix. (Turns out systemd treats fstab differently and can hang booting if USB drive isn’t attached.)
Steam, a 3rd party program, has nuked the home directory of users who didn’t really do anything wrong.
Programs have huge abilities to bork systems, be it Windows or Linux…
I’ve seen RHEL completely crap itself due to a 3rd party update. Wasn’t that long ago fairly certain it was a McAfee update that took down a bunch of our Linux boxes. It happens.
A lot of people I know have mats, trays, or some sort of rollers. Would make for some cool campaign ideas though. Characters are all drugged, drunk, suffering from insanity.
“I’m going to need you to put on these and roll without your mat…”
This is why I can never understand why people would pay baristas. It’s counter service, just take your coffee and go. It’s also part of the reason I don’t go to coffee places. Especially when Dunkin’ Donuts’ coffee tastes better than Starbucks.
They also burn the bujesus out of their coffee so it tastes the same everywhere. McDonald’s does the same thing. Like crap. But it’s ok because they’re really just adding a modicum of coffee to effectively a milkshake.
Dunkin kind of expects you to just do cream and sugar, so the coffee has to be better. So it’s decent coffee. Decent coffee isn’t hard. It’s fucking easy. My 15 dollar Mr Coffee makes decent coffee. 2 million bored teenagers around the country are all capable of pouring grounds in to a machine and pressing a button and producing decent coffee.
Starbucks wants to sell you a bunch of other shit with coffee.
I think the Starbucks burnt beans also are so that when you add it to some sort of milkshake, you can still taste coffee. I drink black coffee and I think I’m a super taster so it’s the grossest flavor outside of trying to drink an IPA
This is probably one of the most egregious reasons that civil rights photos are in black and white in the textbooks despite color cameras having been a well-established thing by then. To make it seem like it was long ago when it was/is still quite recent. RedliningYour textbooks are made in Texas and the publishers therefore use Texan standards nearly everywhere…Educational material should not be made in red states.
Textbooks are likely to use pictures from photojournalists which were mostly black and white in the days of print media. It also likely makes it cheaper to print the textbooks.
And yet other pictures of famous people in these textbooks were/are in color. There is a visual discrepancy in presentation and it misleads the viewer (children in this case) in a way they may not even realize for years or decades after. Whether this particular discrepancy is purposeful or not it is problematic.
celebrities get portraits done, civil rights leaders have pictures taken of them by journalists as they do important things. most civil rights leaders didn’t get many professional portraits done, the textbooks use the pictures of them actually doing things. tough you may have a point that it would be good to include a color picture or two of them if they’re out there.
There are color photos out there, ain’t a hard thing to look up. Journalists were probably shooting in color even if they weren’t getting printed that way since the average person could have a color camera by that point in time.
You’re reading too much into it. Colour ink was still expensive back then up until the late '80s to '00s. Which is why coloured photos were uncommon before, especially in the 1960s.
And before anyone suggests it, professional historians strongly discourage colouring black and white photos. This could give false impression of what the actual colour of some objects, or the subject itself in the photo.
We rate this claim as partly false because it excludes context essential to understanding the difference in use between black-and-white and color photographs taken during that time period.
Although there is documented evidence of photo suppression during the civil rights movement, experts said the use of black-and-white over color photography was not part of it.
The post is misinformed and overlooks the fact that color photography was rare in the 1960’s due to its higher price, photojournalists’ need for quick turn-around, the sentiment of black-and-white photography being the “true” way of documentation and the challenges surrounding accurately depicting people of color with color film.
In addition to color being too expensive for textbooks, it was also too expensive for newspapers. And colour film was more expensive than black and white film. Since photos taken by photo journalists at the time were meant to be printed in newspapers in B&W, most photographers shot with B&W film even while the technology for colour photography existed.
the sentiment of black-and-white photography being the “true” way of documentation
Well… B&W does have better resolution, both back then and now. Notice how many photos from NASA probes are in B&W? It’s because to get color you either have to take three photos with filters on them and combine them together, which is what NASA does. Or have clusters of three different sensors in an array to pick up the different wavelengths, which is what most consumer cameras do. But that effectively cuts the resolution into a third of what it could be if you had sensors that simply detected light without caring about the wavelength.
Of course the way most cameras are constructed you don’t get any benefit from B&W in terms of resolution since the way the sensors are arrayed is optimized for colour. But NASA’s cameras allow for higher resolution B&W images (when they already know the colour of the thing they’re looking at and they want to see detail) and the filters are there when they need to figure out what colour something is.
The DNC replied that you are just a secret Trump fan. The party knows what is best and you should not expect primaries and having a say. Also we have always been at war with East-Asia.
Surely there’s one better young person in the USA ?
None of them ran. Biden’s admin and his fund raising base held enormous sway over the party at-large. As soon as he corralled the support of this tiny monied elite, everyone else had to either get in line or get marked as party pariahs and ousted for their disloyalty.
The pastiche of democracy is predicated on a primary system that can produce and sustain rival candidates. But when leadership in the party are terrified of “Russian bots” and “Leftist Antifa Agitators” undermining the general election, they circle the wagons around their incumbents and bow down to their mega-donors out of cowardice.
No rival candidates means no real primary means no one actually challenges Biden on his merits.
The primary system is obviously corrupted. The incumbent managed to shut out everyone else. This happened on both sides of this inept stupid system. Two candidates who it is painfully obvious are unfit for the job. Geriatrics clogging up the political machine stopping even retirees from having a go.
The youth backlash will eventually upend everything, since not only they are denied a voice, but they will also be made the servants of the boomers for much of the next 20 years.
I’m not sure you realize just how big of a single issue this is.
Trump is a psychopathic cult leader running a campaign of lies, defamation, and retribution. He aspires to be the US’s first authoritarian leader, and wants to turn the nation into a nuclear armed Switzerland. He wants to keep inflation high so that corporate America can continue to enrich the few at the expense of the many. He is literally telling business prices will continue to rise, while simultaneously promising the public that he will bring “Biden’s” high prices down. It’s utter madness.
Because he is “not Trump” could not be a deeper reason to vote for Biden. Especially when not voting or voting for a third party candidate effectively empowers Trump’s campaign and the many more on the right who will always vote for their team no matter what.
For who? The American people are struggling. Meanwhile the wealth gap is wider than it’s literally ever been and Biden is too busy bombing brown children to give a shit
The perception is not quite the same as the reality.
Nevertheless, Trump is doing a better job of fueling this view and promising change, even if it’s all lip service - he doesn’t care because his followers believe everything he says.
The reality is things are better now than in 2020 for most Americans. Unemployment is very low, and wages are up. Relative to the richest of course things are only getting more distant but again, you want Trump to bring equality? Good luck with that, lol.
No I want both of them to unalive, preferably as violently as possible. Unemployment is a vastly flawed metric that doesn’t account for underemployment or discouraged workers, and real wages would be significantly down if the government was accurately measuring inflation, which they’re intentionally not doing so they can continue to pretend that everything’s fine.
Nobody is saying things are fine. They’re just not as bad as they could be, or as bad as might feel to a lot of middle class folks. It’s still very shit for baby though don’t get me wrong.
Not going to wish violence on Biden - he’s only improved things relative to where they were at the end of Trump’s term. But I do want him to walk off into the sunset away from the presidency.
Trump on the other hand I agree is living excrement so I’d be quite happy for him to be flushed. I don’t care about revenge though. I just want his stink gone from the world.
You only say things are fine bc it doesn’t affect you personally that much. Also please stop claiming that Biden has improved anything other than AIPAC’s grip on our tax dollars.
I’m sorry if you’re having a hard time, but the statistics and the Bills Biden has passed are improvements for many, even if they don’t help you personally.
Anyway, hopefully we agree we both want Trump gone, and Biden too. Given how terrible Biden was at the debate there’s a good chance now, and that will mean a better chance the democrats defeat Trump.
Then, the work begins to achieve something even better than what the Democrats have to offer. But it isn’t coming from the right-wing, that’s for sure.
Well, in the current economy, the statistical indicators that economists rely on are booming. GDP, etc. What folks on the left like us are saying is that those indicators are easily measurable but do not paint an accurate picture of what most Americans are experiencing. It doesn’t feel like a boom out here because, well, it ain’t.
It’s not like we’re sipping champagne, kicking it at the beach, and complaining that the guy next door has a nicer beach. We work just as hard as other generations and get a lot less to show for it.
Acknowledging that is important, but corporate politicians in either party seem like they just don’t want to anything about it.
Still voting for Biden, but yeah, not enthusiastically.
Okay, yeah nah I’m with you. I like to think that’s what I was getting at, but you said it better.
If I could vote for Biden I too, would do so without enthusiasm. Let’s hope he steps down though. I swear anyone else has a better chance at this point.
The only outcome that might suck even more is if Biden did step down, Kamala steps up, and she still loses. Cuz then it’s like… oh so we’re just gonna be misogynistic as a voter base now, great, thanks fellow Americans. Like, we were ready to vote for a shambling shell of an old man but not a lady with Hillary Clinton energy, okay. 🤦
Really, if the Dems brought in someone who was like… 50 (and probably not Newsom owing to prolonged hateboner for Cali) they’d gain 10 points in the polls immediately. Whether true or not, the narrative that Biden is old and doddering is there and that debate performance did nothing to dissuade it.
“I just don’t get why people would like ‘not’ being set on fire. Like, it’s just a little fire, what are you, combustible fats wrapped in flammable organic fabrics? I guess it’s simply that it’s not being set on fire that they like. It’s so weird and frustrating.”
why? this is all the results of men being in power, including the odd thing that favors women sometimes, like custody battles being usually easier for women. it comes from the patriarchal view that looking after children is the mother’s job and the father barely needs to have anything to do with it.
same here: men are stronger and women are weaker, not to mention women shouldn’t be working to begin with but since they do they might as well retire early.
To me as a layman it immediately brings up a connection to feminism. I don’t think that anybody who will want to get men to think different will get very far using the word “patriarchy”, given men being more right leaning.
There isn’t much substance to my argument than “nuh uh I don’t like that word” but it is what it is. There must be some better approach “marketing wise”, despite patriarchy being technically correct.
Kyriarchy refers to the overlap of various inequalities caused by gender, race, sexuallity and disability describing overlaps of cross sectionality. It also refers to the practice of problems created by assumed superiority.
Britain did until quite recently. Then a group of men went to court, I think hoping to get the men’s age lowered to that of women. But of course the government raised the women’s age to that of men.
The “of course” makes it clear you dislike the outcome. The long mention of the men who in your eyes “caused” this also makes it pretty obvious what your stance is about this and who you want to be the scapegoat in the discussion.
The “of course” makes it clear you dislike the outcome
Only inasmuch as a desirable outcome would have been the lowering of the age of retirement for men to either that of women or meeting both on the middle. The issue is that the government being the government took it as an excuse to effectively cut welfare.
The long mention of the men who in your eyes “caused” this
To be honest it probably just brought it on sooner. The government would have found it as excuse to raise the retirement age without it being highlighted to them.
also makes it pretty obvious what your stance is about this and who you want the scapegoat to be in the discussion.
Wow that’s some projection. You are reading deeply between the lines to find your take on that one.
I immediately got it as “why would the people in power ever make it easier for those not” but hey why bother with nuanced takes when the Internet will allow you to be angry at your specific beliefs as if they are the only truth, right?
As a French tho, do watch the debate between Gabriel Attal, Merdella and Manuel Bombard. See how Bompard (the left wing candidate) politely wipes the floor with both shitbags.
The thing that’s pissing me off though is that the centrist party decided it would rather demonize the left than the alt right, I suppose they know they already lost and are trying to get as many votes off of those they know might vote for them (some socialists).
Yeah, I think going toe to toe with the far right once again was always Macron’s plan. This is the foe he’s familiar with, against whom he won before. The short deadline for the anticipated election was probably to keep the left from organizing, as to not disturb their duel. But it backfired when the left immediately formed the Front Populaire. Now he’s nervous. The polls give his party third place, so he’s playing for second. He thinks if it’s the centrist against the far right, the “barrage vote” will save him once more.
What’s shocking is the extent to which they go to demean the left, and the amount of media that help spread his baseless accusation. Everyone knows at this point that the center will lose, so they’re choosing who they’ll lose too. They maybe think it’ll erase the left and let Macron’s clan be seen as the alternative to fascism during the next presidential elections…
Centerists will always attack the left rather than the right. They are actually right wingers that don’t want the social stigma that goes with admitting that you’re right wing. Once the progressives have been killed off by the right wing, the liberals will take the mask off.
The lot of them are cowards and the left is a whole lot less scary than the right, since we don’t go on random killing sprees frequently.
lemmy.world
Top