I certainly hope so.

The part I’m worried about is how long it’s going to be possible to buy hardware that’s not locked down. It’s almost impossible to buy a phone that doesn’t need to be hacked to get root nowadays.

From what I saw, they’re mostly focusing on purging the left from Twitter. It’s gonna turn into Gab the way things are going.

Yeah, the west is becoming rapidly isolated geopolitically and it’s not even self sufficient. I have no idea why anybody would think that US could take on China and come out on top. This further highlights that US regime consists of utter imbeciles.

The idea of US taking on China absolutely deranged in every respect, yet so was the idea that they could use Ukraine as a proxy to take apart Russia. Yet, here we are.

As George Carlin put it: the planet will be fine, the people are fucked.

I think they’d love to outlaw general purpose computing. We can already see a preview of what that looks like with how mobile devices work. You don’t have root privileges on the device, and it’s explicitly locked from you. You are only allowed to install software from the official sources, and this software can be wiped remotely from your device if its deemed inappropriate. This is the future of computing that’s being envisioned. The computer just becomes another appliance as opposed to a general purpose computing machine that you yourself can program.

this is a very good read on the subject https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/tedchiang/the-real-danger-to-civilization-isnt-ai-its-runaway

I just want you to acknowledge it. You made a big stink that the source I provided said that NATO is directly involved in the conflict. Yet, US officials say this regarding Iran and you’ve already acknowledge that it’s the same level of involvement. Have the intellectual integrity to admit this.

Please answer the question. How does the US official characterize the involvement of Iran in the war? We’re talking about what the officials of your regime are saying about the matter.

What does the quote from the official cited in the article say?

seethe and cope

Here is how US officials refer to Iran’s involvement:

Iran is now fully engaged in Russia’s war, the official said. The deepening ties carry liabilities for the Islamic Republic.

Since you agree that the level of involvement is a good comparison, then it follows that NATO is in fact a direct participant in the war. Thus the article I linked is making a factually correct statement.

Given that NATO is currently supplying weapons and ammunition, training troops, sending in advisors and mercenaries to this war, it is beyond absurd to claim that the west is not a direct participant in this war. Furthermore, the west claims that Iran is a participant in the war because it is supplying material aid to Russia, and using the same standard the west is too. In fact, Baerbock blurted out this truth just recently. One has to take complete leave of their senses to pretend otherwise. If that’s the best criticism you can come up of the article that really says volumes.

Ah yes, it’s not a US state approved propaganda source. Yet, what do you dispute in that article in specifically?

Try reading your comment when you’re sober and you’ll just how deranged it is.

It really depends on how interactive the site needs to be. Managing the state of the UI on the frontend makes sense for sites where there is a lot of dynamic content. An email app is a good example. On the other hand, something like a blog or a news site likely doesn’t need a lot of interactivity. Also worth noting that htmx is an interesting compromise.

Stop accusing me of what you’re doing here. You’re the one who went on a rant about carbon credits, and I simply corrected the misinformation in your statements. Kind of hilarious that you accuse me of having an obsession with getting in the last word in vapid comment free of any actual content. Maybe try looking in a mirror sometimes.

Nah, I have a perfectly realistic understanding of what carbon credits mean in practice and the track record this approach has over many years now. The theme of these discussions is that you make claims that don’t stand up to scrutiny, and then slink away when pressed on them.

That’s just flat out false. A rich place like Europe should be focusing on producing things it needs itself using clean energy sources. That’s an actual start. Simply externalizing these costs is literally helping nobody. So far the only innovation I see is in the creative accounting department where Europe makes itself look as if it’s doing some sort of a meaningful transition to clean energy.