Are they? As the article OP shares suggests, these films quietly make us compare our lives to what is portrayed on screen. This is advertisement 101: display people in enviable positions to portray a sense of longing for a lifestyle that one would not normally seek. A food commercial isn’t selling you a product, it’s trying to make you hungry.

If all you wanted out of these rom coms is the portrayal of a carefree life, you could just watch pharmaceutical, banking, or insurance ads.

Other than making sure to be wearing your glasses if you are near sighted enough that your local licence requires it, glasses are an irrelevant factor. It’s not like you are going into active combat duty…

Can’t tell if you are joking. I know a lot of junior developers who think this is a legitimate solution.

I get it, we don’t need billionaires in our society. That aside, what makes you think this is intentional exploitation?

I do OOP because it naturally encourages me to do this sort of thing: abstract complicated logic into inspectable, reusable, testable properties of an object.

The Design of Everyday Things

Lemmy lacks niche interest communities, beyond stuff like Linux.

These freedoms are a strength indeed, but they are also a vulnerability that can be exploited by foreign powers. Freedoms remain free so long as the people exercising those freedoms do so responsibly. I think a lot of people in the US do not exercise this freedom responsibly. I think a lot of Americans are being manipulated into voting in autocracy. Ironically.

Complete and total freedom is just anarchy, and anarchy collapses on itself and turns into autocracy.

Anyone can build a bridge. Only an engineer can build a bridge that barely stands.

In the same way, the fact that one built a large online platform, that doesn’t necessarily mean it was built with minimal ressources and without taking past or future risk.

Engineering is, as a profession, specifically the application of scientific principles to solve problems the right way, the first time, that is to say efficiently, and with minimal risk.

The fact that one codes, or wields a wrench, or operates a C&C machine does not mean one is applying science to solve problems efficiently and managing risk. These are entirely different skills and professions.

People have access to more information, but less access to tough life lessons, and therefore less experience (ranging from survival skills, to applied political science, etc.).

Is being “enlightened” mean you have more (possibly fake) information, or does it mean having more life experience? You decide…

It depends on the law really. There is no one rule.

For example, owning lockpicks is in many places not illegal, but owning lockpicks with the intent of bypassing a lock is.

Some laws are very specific about the severity or testability of a crime where as others are not. In that case a judge has to interpret the criteria for legal tests, either from previous case law or by building new case law.

In any case, being charged for something or not is a completely separate issue. Things are no less illegal just because the state has no resource or will to execute the law.

Also, being charged does not mean you broke the law either. Nor does judgment determine it (although it’s a very strong hint) since a latter appeal could acquit you of chargers.

The determination of guilt is in the facts of what happened. And that’s the whole point of the legal system. Being charged, getting judgement, appealing. It’s all a process to determine guilt or not. It is not itself the mechanism of guilt.

The idea of a “guilty conscience” enshrines this idea in expression.

This wouldn’t pass PR review and automated tests, unless they were a senior dev and used elevated privileges to mess with things behind the scenes.

To add to what has already been said about it taking a large effort, the follow up question is then, why don’t governments fund all this effort publicly through taxes, like what is done with roads, scientific research, education, healthcare?

Well the short answer is that high-performance computing specifically is a strategic resource. Publicly funding roads only benefits the country doing the funding, so that is an easy decision to make. Meanwhile, much of the publicly funded scientific research has minimal to no strategic value (or may only be of value in states capable of that investment in the first place), so this is also an easy decision to make. But giving away technological investments in strategic ressources to rival states is a pretty bad move.

Propaganda and cultural isolationism is a hell of a drug. I blame their leaders, and victimhood dialed all the way up. Everyday Israelis are victims themselves of manipulation.

It’s pretty simple math. They get to look like the good guys. Pretty important when they’ve got all sorts of investments in Africa and the Middle East.

This raises more questions than it answers, like how do the deaf from birth function in society at all if they struggle with other languages besides sign language. How do they get a job, go to school, learn new skills, read the news, text people? What do they do in their leisure if not watching subtitles movies or reading books? Many non-english speakers end up learning English anyway because of just how pervasive it is.

You might get up votes if you accompanied a controversial opinion with a reasoned argument. However, making only broad, unsubstantiated statements is a waste of bandwidth and everyone’s time.

The job of HR is to manage employee needs, not to make business decisions, like what kind of employees are a good fit for a team. The moment HR gets involved with that decision making is the moment a poisonous cancer mestastatises and starts killing the company from within.

Capitalism: a short story.

This article replaces the “Google is cracking down on ad blockers” mantra with “Google is consolidating control by restricting general purpose computing as the model of security”.

Honestly, I’m not sure this is a better look. It’s true that this is “more secure”, in the sense that it limits the power afforded to malicious extensions, but it completely ignores the collateral damage. It strips the power individuals have to enact their own policies, instead having to go through Google to accomplish the same thing.

Honestly, this is just another step in the direction of WebDRM and centralized control. This is more erosion of what made the Internet great. It’s just one more step of turning the Internet into a TV set.

Fuck. This. Shit. Give me back web 1.0.