Sorry but when you said “some people”, you didn’t explicitly specify the gender of the people you were referring to, so now I am confused and terrified. In future please use “some male people” or “some female people” to avoid inflicting your gender ideology on me.

Polling in Ukraine consistently puts approval of Zelensky’s handling of the war at around 90%.

Please actually try listening to the people you’re speaking on behalf of before you speak.

In the analogy, I have a whole lot of their money. You never watch Heat? Like that, but I didn’t fuck it up thanks to my many years of watching heist movies and playing Payday 2.

Oh man, love this idea. I’m gonna try it on my bank. “Here’s the deal, I keep all the money that I’ve already stolen, and you have to agree not to call the cops or hire any additional security.” Brilliant.

Not sure what the bank is supposed to get out of it though.

I love 1Password, they’re great (I personally use Bitwarden for my passwords, but would happily recommend either of them). But by putting both your authenticator codes and your passwords in the same place, you now have a single point of failure. What happens if someone finds an exploit in 1Password that gives them access to your account? The whole point of 2FA is to not have a single point of failure.

That’s still a single point of failure. What happens if someone finds an exploit that bypasses the login process entirely?

That seems like it defeats the “2” part of 2FA. If your password manager is compromised the attackers now how complete access.

Every single headline about this aid distribution should just read “US still somehow taking orders from nation that only exists because of their support.”

The idea that Isreal can block the US from just driving aid over the border is insane. The idea that Isreal can dictate any terms to the US is insane. If the US actually pulled all support, Isreal would be fucked, and they know it. But the US government keeps throwing up its hands and acting like Isreal has them over a barrel.

Did you actually read this? I don’t think you did. Either that or you’re being extremely dishonest right now.

Doctorow is briefly mentioned in passing in this blog post. His only involvement was a single tweet that in absolutely no way mentioned or even implied it was about Wu. Despite that she decided to make it about her anyway, and declared that Cory was leading some kind of witch hunt against her based on no evidence other than her own decision that she automatically counted as a “garbage person” in his mind. We have zero evidence that this was actually Cory’s intent, just her assertion that it must have been his meaning.

To take that and turn it into “he was involved in the media harassment and witch hunting of a famous Chinese tech girl Naomi Wu” isa disgustingly disingenuous twisting of the available facts.

It’s not impossible that Cory shares some blame in the events described - no one is perfect, every hero is some kind of bastard, yada yada - but the evidence you’ve offered doesn’t come remotely close to backing up the claims you’re making, and it’s dangerously irresponsible to share such a claim on such a flimsy basis.

I’m actually looking at doing a wrapper around NMap. Personally I’m fine with “Just use NMap” as a solution, but I need something that’s usable by people who know only a little about Linux and aren’t super comfortable in the command line. So I want to do stuff like enumerating the interfaces and just letting them pick one to scan instead of having to specify a network. I’ll probably work in a really basic UI using Dialog or something as well.

Yeah, loathe as I am to say anything kind about the Iranian regime, this is still a remarkably constrained response given the circumstances. Isreal blew up their embassy, killing two of their top generals. Obviously, in an ideal world you’d work out a purely diplomatic solution, but then in an ideal world Isreal wouldn’t have blown up that embassy in the first place. The Iranian government know they have to show strength or else the backlash among their people would be insane. They were put between a rock and a hard place and picked a pretty smart way out.

And they know damn well that this whole thing kicked off in the first place because Netanyahu is trying to engineer a war. He knows he’s losing international support with his genocide in Gaza, and a war with Iran would effectively reset the field. As soon as its “ally vs enemy” all the other questions go out the window. Isreal gets a clean slate, and probably wipes out or at least seriously damages several enemies in the process. The only question is how he can make it happen in a way that will draw the US in.

Would you by any chance mind sharing? I was going to make my own, but a good starting point never hurts.

(feel free to say no, I don’t want to impose)

It’s the dumbest thing, but right now I just really want a better open source alternative to Advanced IP Scanner. Or I want someone to add a filter (especially by MAC) option to Angry IP Scanner. Whatever. I just want an IP scanner that can filter by MAC and works on Linux.

Deep down, every Vim user just wants one person to tell them that the countless hours they spent leaning to use it weren’t a total waste of time.

Ah, the Skaven solution.

Divorce

Makes sense: Even a marriage is easier to exit than Vim

I’d argue that the obvious desired state is simple; people should not struggle to afford housing. Every other consideration is secondary to that. The question is just how to get there.

To be decided by committee. We’d have to study both options and examine the potential negative and positive impacts.

In general the goal of the rent formula would be to keep average rents at a low percentage of average incomes. That means a typical two person apartment should clock in at, say for arguments sake, around 20% of monthly minimum wage. So even if there was some flex in rental prices, it should basically be impossible for anyone to struggle to make rent.

That said, I think it would definitely be important to ensure that an increase in desirability in an area doesn’t end up punishing the existing inhabitants. That way lies gentrification. This would tend to argue against factoring in desirability. A waiting list system will naturally push people away from areas that are highly desirable, since no one will want to wait that long for somewhere to live. I suspect that alone would be a sufficient solution, but again, I’d like to see it studied.

Obviously, there are problems this can’t solve, but they need their own solutions. More walkable neighbourhoods, better public transit, these are the kind of factors that would help reduce housing pressure on specific areas by making everywhere more desirable to live. Same goes for ensuring fair distribution of resources to schools and other public amenities, and so on.

First off, let’s assess the purpose of this question. If you’re implying that an argument against a system is invalid without a fully thought out proposal to replace it, you’re engaging in pointless sophistry. If someone says “I think my leg is broken” you don’t ask them to tell you exactly how they think it should be fixed before you believe them. We don’t have to know the solution in order to realise we have a problem.

With that caveat out of the way, I’m personally a big advocate for getting private capital out of rental markets. I know a lot of people just want to eliminate renting altogether, but I agree that this is short sighted. It either relies on the idea that everyone owns their home, which isn’t always practical, or that people simply have homes provided at no cost, which opens up its own complications. Basically, while I am in favour of the total destruction of capitalism, I don’t think that has to mean getting rid of money. Money is a very useful way of tokenising resources so that they can easily be exchanged. This allows for more efficient distribution of the correct resources to the people who most need them.

What I want to see is rentals at a price that everyone can afford l. Obviously, in an ideal scenario this would be paired with UBI to ensure that no one ever goes unhoused, but we’ll focus on the housing side for now.

If given total power over my country’s political system, I would look to implement a scheme that would ultimately result in rentals being handled only by Crown corporations (not-for-profit entities operating at arm’s length from the government) created with a mandate to provide affordable rental properties. These corporations would invest building and buying housing in their area in order to fulfill this mandate. They would also be required to offer rent to own schemes. Rental rates would be set by a formula that would account for factors affecting the desirability of a property such as location, square footage and amenities. Conflicts would be solved by waiting lists.

Private rentals would be outlawed (with possible carve-outs for situations like a property owner who is temporarily away from their primary residence - even in these situations, the rental would be handled by the Crown corp with the collected rents passing to the property owner, minus a handling fee). Most likely this scheme would be phased in over time, allowing investment property owners to sell off their properties to the Crown corps. Investors would take a hit on this, but any economic downsides will be more than offset by the upside of the vast majority of the populace becoming, in effect, significantly wealthier (in GDP terms the economy would certainly shrink, but GDP is a terrible measure of economic health).

Unfortunately necessary disclaimer: This is the rough outline of a proposal. Were I actually in a position to implement it, a LOT of details would be worked out in committee, with advice from respected experts. This disclaimer shall be henceforth known as “The Sign”. Do not make me tap “The Sign.”

Weird headline given that the Tories are the UK government.

What this seems to actually mean is “some backbenchers”