• 0 Posts
  • 1.39K Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: December 29th, 2023

help-circle

  • as shitty as it is they stand for getting reelected, which when compared with “not the overt fascists” should be a pretty good platform… if only they learned something from trump and realized that being loudly pro-your-issues is a positive and being quiet and non-committal is a death sentence

    being loudly “we can’t let this ever happen again and here’s how we strengthen the system” should be their platform





  • i’d say it’s a balance… you’re totally right that individual requests for review should be relatively small (mostly so that they can all fit in your head at once), but imo equally valid is that everything in main should be a complete feature/fix: if you were to be gone immediately after merging, would someone need to continue or revert the change? would there be unused code laying around?

    this is where merge trains and a decent UI around them comes in handy: your main work is on a branch many small PRs each reviewed individually merge into that branch, and then when you’re done pretty much just automated integration tests, lint, and you’re good to merge the whole

    but equally some people prefer to solve this with things like gitflow, or just not at all and accept that main is always in flux

    refactor to support a new feature is also tricky: does it belong with the feature because it’s unnecessary abstraction without it? or is it its own PR because it stands in its own? and if it’s its own PR then how do you base your own feature branch on it before someone reviews and merges? how do you know you’re done without finishing? what if your assumptions are wrong and you need to try something new - just a lot of unnecessary churn and review?

    dev is messy and as always LOC is a pretty useless metric… keeping things understandable is key, and somethings a 17k line PR is the cleanest way to proceed






  • it’s a shit policy that sounds good on the surface (like most liberal policies)

    apparently:

    • despite what the libs say they likely won’t be able to run through the loop because it’s not about diesel fumes; it’s about having large volumes of fuel in the tunnels
    • the issue with increased capacity is there is already track congestion
    • the works currently being done on station and track upgrades are all required for hybrid or electrification capacity, so when those upgrades are done why wouldn’t you just electrify instead of wasting money on a half way solution that’ll need to be chucked out in a few years when it’s eventually electrified anyway

  • whilst modern anarchism certainly has a lot of good points to make, anarchism in general also covers some pretty horrendous ways of structuring society…

    anarchism is, at its core, is just absense of government and rulers

    The word “anarchy” was first defined by Ancient Greek philosophy, which understood it to be a corrupted form of direct democracy, where a majority of people exclusively pursue their own interests

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchy

    that original definition pretty well covers “everyone for themselves anarchy”

    you can argue “yes but no serious anarchist”, but the word at its core doesn’t just mean the serious and thought out structures

    it is what it is: anarchy can mean chaos, it’s just that when discussing with people who are discussing the implementation of anarchy, it’s widely agreed that chaos is not the goal and thus other systems are put in place

    it is frustrating that the modern version of the word has become synonymous with only the kind of anarchism that’s generally agreed is not the way any of this should be implemented… but anarchism still covers those shit takes



  • i think that aspiring to be a politician, and even becoming a politician isn’t so bad… there are a few people i know that went into politics and they legitimately did it to make a difference

    many get corrupted and i reckon it pretty much requires abandoning morals to become one of the “top” politicians, but there are plenty of staffers in the world that don’t and do legitimate good at the expense of their own standing

    if they get into it with eyes wide open as to the reality and for the right reasons, credit to them: it’s what they do after that that matters

    public service is still noble, even if most politics has become a perversion of that


  • investment is an important way that money flows around an economy. safer investments tend to move money slowly… if people think conditions can flip on a dime, that adds risk and more risk leads to people making otherwise safer investments (this goes double: more risk usually means more reward, so if you increase baseline risk then you’re negatively effecting both sides of the equation)… we do things like grandfathering in laws because of someone in good faith invests in something it’s good to have reasonable expectations that they’re not going to have the risk calculation changed underneath them - otherwise you have to take that risk for all classes of investment, and that’s far worse than the small (probably ~10 year) loss from not catching out the practices you’re trying to change in existing activities


  • Pup Biru@aussie.zonetoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldclever
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    24 days ago

    that’s not a useful metric though. the science of winemaking isn’t some dark secret. given enough money to replicate conditions i’m sure even saudi arabia could produce a wine that blind tests better than french wines

    the point of comparing regions is their average wine: pick up a random wine off the shelf from each region and how comparable is it?

    french wine isn’t good by magic - french wine is good for the same reason french pastry, bread, and cheese are also good. because it’s deeply ingrained in french culture that these are things that you don’t accept bad versions of. bad wine doesn’t sell in france. americans are less picky. each wine region adapts to local conditions



  • you’re right of course, but i think part of the sentiment behind “once a maga, always a magat” is that often people in the MAGAsphere don’t actually admit that the original premise is wrong, or change their way of thinking, or develop critical thinking skills: they just get personally burned…

    changing how you ingest and process information about the world is a very hard thing to do, and few “reformed MAGAs” have likely done that work… we should applaud them for leaving their current cult, but the next one right around the corner might grab them just as hard