The way I feel about slow walkers or families who spread out to block the entire path is what I need to keep me humble and remember that there’s no such thing as a “good person”.
Writing prompts or some kind of creative writing exercise
It’s a lifestyle choice to live in a tent and not invade some rich persons mansion.
They’re not wrong.
Apple has a better stance on data privacy than google because their profit model is being a premium consumer device whereas googles profit model is being a provider of ads.
Apple’s incentives are closer to the consumer since they want to make the consumer happy while googles incentives are aligned with the trackers because that improves ad revenue.
This changes the DNA of the OS.
Plus the integration of googles data insecure services with android mean that as a matter of actual reality then discussing the security of android really means discussing the data security of those integrated services. It’s unavoidable.
Don’t trust either of course but I simply do have more confidence my apple data isn’t being exploited as much as my google data simply because Apple doesn’t stand as much to gain and stands more to lose from being embarrassed on the issue.
And pointing to custom android roms that replace google services with FOSS alternatives is a technically correct but still wrong answer to this because it doesn’t reflect the reality of the overwhelming majority of android users.
6Howard always implied a distinction between Asian countries and Australia's Asian communities. As Brett (Citation2003: 151) reminds us, Asian-Australians were consistently presented as individuals instead of members of cultural groups. As such, and by virtue of the fact that they had brought in values like family, hard work and entrepreneurial flair – not coincidentally the restricted pool of ‘Asian values’ that overlapped with Howard's cultural outlook – ‘Australians of Asian descent’ could aspire to be ‘as honoured citizens as any other section of the Australian community’ (Howard Citation1996).This circumstance allowed the ‘integration’ of Asians as individuals maintaining the separateness from Asian countries from the identitarian point of view.
8In a speech to the Heritage Foundation – often overlooked supposedly because it was given three years into his ‘retirement’ – Howard (Citation2010: 5–6) stated that ‘the values that bind the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand … are deeper and more abiding … than the bonds between any other countries’ and that ‘one of the errors that some sections of the English-speaking world have made in the past few decades has been to confuse multiracialism and multiculturalism’, to conclude that ‘the English-speaking nations have made an enormous contribution … in excess of any other grouping of countries – to the defence of liberty in the last two hundred years’. Howard thus appropriated the whole intellectual body underlying the Anglospherist perspective in its entirety.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10361146.2014.965658
Emphasizing “shared values” in international relations and emphasizing the closeness of “values” with similarly anglo-sphere nations.
The “shared values” rhetoric is a very thin wrapper hiding outright white supremacism.
Permanently Deleted
It seems the true number was 18 after all, like Hamas was saying, and not 54 like Israel was saying.
https://www.nationthailand.com/thailand/general/40032323
Also Hamas has already reached an agreement with Thailand to release the Thai hostages but Israel is so far refusing to cooperate with their release.
https://www.bangkokpost.com/thailand/general/2673106/hamas-ready-to-free-all-thais
Well I appreciate your perspective. Perhaps in your community there was activism on this issue before it reached the halls of power.
Seeing it as your right, having an expectation that it should be a right, isn’t the same as being a legal right though.
You could have said you disagreed with the court but unless you’re sitting on that court you can disagree all you want and it actually just doesn’t mean anything in terms of changing the reality that it’s not up to you what legal rights are or how the constitution is interpreted because that’s what the Supreme Court is for - and it says so in the constitution.
A legal right is a constructed and formal concept. A legal right simply does not exist unless the courts say it does even if you strongly feel it should exist. That’s what I’m saying.
And since 2008 that legal right has existed but before then it simply didn’t.
And I’m not a liberal man. I’m not even anti-guns.
I am a progressive and you probably view the terms progressive and liberal as synonyms but they aren’t.
In fact youre the one who is appealing to an idealism here, and in that sense you’re more of a liberal than I am even if I’m closer to them in the sense or being a progressive. You’re pointing to a right existing in some almost metaphysical sense, ie you’re saying that because people felt it should be a right you’re saying it in some sense existed. Which is liberal idealism.
Look, we probably aren’t actually very far in terms of what we think sensible gun policy should be since I think if you’re in Montana or whatever then yeah sure a rifle makes a lot of sense and can be a lot of fun and you pointed to the more modern and moderate 2a types which probably places you actually not far from me in terms of what we would agree sensible gun laws could be.
What I said is that the legal right to own a gun was created in 2008 and that is a straightforward fact. It’s DC vs. Heller. 2008. Look it up if you want to. Going on about how some people really felt it should be a right before then doesn’t change that, and it is also a fact that if you were to ask a mainstream legal scholar in the 80s or early to mid 90s you would have to look into some pretty partisan political camps to find someone who would have advocated the current interpretation that was established recently in 2008.
But of course since the late 90s and certainly in the late 2000s you can find a lot of them. That’s also a fact.
Yeah I would never use vanilla JS unless forced to these days. Always Typescript if I’m doing anything JS related that isn’t completely trivial.
As for HTMX, it looks fun but I would consider that kind of fancy and fresh framework more appropriate for hobby projects or a rapid iteration proof of concept and not for production. For a start it’s just fresh and that alone means you can’t really use it yet except for more trivial cases since you need to be assured that the tool will be able to scale with your needs and it just hasn’t been proven for that yet.
Secondly if you need to be able to scale a team then you need to either be willing to pay to train people in a new framework (and there are a constant stream of cool new frameworks so training should be conservative), or you need to be able to hire for it easily and to hire for it easily it should be a widely used framework with a deep of talent available.
Finally it lacks type safety, at least so far as I can see, and so I wouldn’t want to use it for anything more complex than a storefront.
I can totally see that being a fun tool to use for a hobby project and maybe in two to five years we will all be using it just like we are all using react and vue today but there’s value in being conservative in these choices when you’re looking for scalability, long term maintainability, and the ability to assemble a team.
And finally it’s not the first js in html framework. It’s been done before and hasn’t really caught on. Maybe HTMX will be different, im not saying it won’t be the one to crack that nut because it very well might be the future who knows, but I would want to see it’s approach to be proven before selecting it since in the past js in html has tended to hit a wall. Like you can often do some really cool shit with minimal code and you fall in love but then you hit some use case that requires more complex logic and bam you find yourself either resorting to traditional JS anyway or even worse you are left stuck.
These are general remarks on why fancy fresh isn’t necessarily the best. I haven’t used HTMX so it’s possible it will be the next big thing. Eventually something will replace React / Vue / Svelte for sure and maybe it’s HTMX.
But that’s the rationale for considering for a hobbyist tool or a rapid prototyping tool rather than a production ready framework.
Today for anything that really needs to scale and where SSR is desired i would almost certainly be choosing Vue or React or maybe Svelte. And if I was feeling adventurous I might use Qwik since it’s not a radical departure from those others, being a lot of the best of Svelte with some cool new ideas.
These things move in cycles of course and clearly we need to start moving on from Vue and React soon since SSR is an afterthought in their design. But that needs to be balanced against a healthy conservativism if the product needs longer term scale and maintenance.
I think the more immediate path forward is to get much better server side runtimes such as bun and smarter caching and bundling techniques. Bun or some other very snappy and optimized server side js engine, using html templating more than jsx components, with very smart webpack bundling and extensive caching using an islands or micro frontends architecture for progressive enhancement is a more conservative choice that can achieve a lot.
Maybe something like HTMX will be a paradigm shift. It will happen soon enough of course. But I wouldn’t throw away a decade of tooling and development in those less sexy frameworks too easily. Not when there are less radical changes we can make to achieve dramatically better results that are still on the table that don’t require the adoption of unproven and not widely used frameworks.
Sorry I’ve written a lot here xD but to add one more comment, for server side code dotnet is making huge strides and modern dotnet core is blazing fast now. Sure it’s not necessarily the fastest but it’s nonetheless really fast now and it comes with DECADES of proven use, a massive community, and tooling that is second to none. If I didn’t want to use server side JS it would take a very fancy framework indeed to convince me to forgo the decades of proven reliability and development that is available to me there. Plus I can say with a very high degree of certainty that dotnet will still be around in 5-10 and probably even 20 years from now while HTMX has a high chance of disappearing to another fresh faced sexy framework in the near future.
My apologies if this was too long or repetitive :)
I didn’t say anything about Reagan. If you are saying “Fuck Reagan” then we don’t disagree about anything important so far as Reagan is concerned.
As for it not being a legal right in the USA that’s a straightforward fact. It was DC vs. Heller, a 2008 case where a Washington DC law was found to be unconstitutional which is the first case where such a law restricting access to handguns was found to be unconstitutional. There were plenty such laws prior to 2008 that survived legal challenges which is what proves the legal right to own a gun didn’t exist prior. But in 2008 the Supreme Court stated the law was unconstitutional at the federal level (DC being a federal district) establishing an individualized right to guns for the first time.
And it was in 2010 that this was extended to additionally restrict the law making power of states, in addition to the federal government, since by default the constitution is understood to restrict the federal government and not the states, but the poorly defined legal doctrine of “incorporation” basically says some bits are applied to restrict states as well.
In the sense of having an individualized legal right to own a gun, prior to 2008 it didn’t exist.
As for ruby ridge types saying shall not be infringed sure, I’m sure many of them advocated the maximalist interpretation way back when that the courts later adopted in 2008, but up until at least the late 90s the idea that weapons could be regulated wasn’t even controversial and the maximalist position could then be called mostly fringe and was only just beginning to emerge as a position a suit wearing serious legal professional would advocate. Bill Clinton banned a bunch of them in 1994 and no one really blinked an eye at the constitutionality of it and the federal assault weapon ban of 1994 survived legal challenges that it definitely would not have survived after 2008 and DC vs. Heller.
The NRA became a lot more activist in the 80s and 90s and really it was their activism that pushed the once-fringe idea that the constitution required largely unrestricted access to weapons into the mainstream.
Which requires editing out an entire sentence by calling it a prefatory clause, a preamble, which flies in the face of the fundamentals of constitutional interpretation which requires the assumption that each word was written for a reason.
If rapid iteration is more important than performance or cost then you can more easily have a monolithic-ish build system that creates the client and the server from a single code base, or with shared code between them.
If you are trying to upgrade frontenders to be fullstack it’s an easier entry point.
Sometimes the performance characteristics of node actually is useful for serverless since a cold start and a hot start are not very different, closer to a fixed cost just to run a script when compared to something like dotnet which has slow cold starts but fast hot starts. Which is also why it sucks for most server code but on occasion this can be a useful characteristic.
If you want to do serverside rendering with client side hydration then it can be handy to implement the display logic once and run on both the client and the server (eg server side rendering react or vue etc)
Those are a handful of decent reasons but broadly speaking agree, it’s not the best choice if you care about cost and the benefits in the specific cases above are either rare or short lived.
Except really for SSRing with client hydrarion, that’s really the slam dunk case where it’s the more often than not correct choice due to the advantages of not duplicating logic.
The real reason why I often use server side JS is that it’s just faster to write in the first instance if I need to spin something up real quick or for infrequently invoked code where performance and cost don’t really matter. Of course for anything serious it’s a bad choice.
20 years of software engineering and you too will have a 10-20% chance of knowing how to exit vim.
The 2a doesn’t, or didn’t until 2010, make reasonable gun control outside government legislation.
It was a sharp shift to the constitution first in 2008 at the federal level and then applied to the states under the doctrine of incorporation in 2010.
Gun nuts like to pretend it is some eternal constant, or more likely most of them simply don’t know the law here and are just parroting the gun lobby take on things, but it’s a straightforward fact that the individualized right to own guns didn’t even really exist until 2008 and the near complete inability to pass any gun laws didn’t exist until 2010.
The 2a was reinterpreted very recently. Before 2008 it wasn’t well defined and most assumed the bit about militias had something to do with it. Scalia basically is the one who decided to edit out that part of the constitution by calling it a preamble, which is extremely against the fundamental principles of constitutional interpretation which is to assume every word was written for a reason.
And for the record I like guns and am for gun policies that allow sane and healthy adults to have guns.
Unlike your Java program amirite.
The benefit of java is that you didn’t write the security holes in your software.