IHeartBadCode @ IHeartBadCode @kbin.social

Posts

1

Comments

618

Joined

2 yr. ago

Risky click of the day.

Question: How does one fuck Healthcare? I was under the impression by experience that it fucked you and not the other way around.

"The mature and responsible thing to do would have been to add a content security policy to the page", he wrote. "I am not mature so instead what I decided to do was render the early 2000s internet shock image Goatse with a nice message superimposed over it in place of the app if Sqword detects that it is in an iFrame."

I submit the Internet axiom of: there's times and places for a measured and reasonable response, and the other times are funny af.

Let this be a lesson to you—if you are using an iFrame to display a site that isn't yours, even for legitimate purposes, you have no control over that content—it can change at any time. One day instead of looking into an iFrame, you might be looking at an entirely different kind of portal.

Bravo.

That's how some of us define that word.

[On this coming Friday] Massive information and 100% evidence will be made available during the Corrupt Trials started by our Political Opponent…

Friday

Judge: Does the defense have anything to add to today's record?

Trump's legal counsel: No we do not your Honor.

Judge: Then the Court is adjourned until Monday at eleven o'clock in the morning.

the tyranny of majority will emerge

Which is why in most democracies there are inalienable rights and due process.

The success of the CEO is dependent of supply and demand, if there are no monopolical privileges

Unless they are a monopoly. Which most societies have established rules to prevent. Outside of those rules, we've seen time and time again such form. Capitalism doesn't have an inbuilt mechanism that prevents a single person owning everything, that tends to be the problem we run into often.

Following your logic, the citizens voting him is a perfect clue of this, am I right?

He's allowed to follow the process to remove the process. That doesn't mean that's a good choice. But yeah, you can absolutely use that logic to follow to that end. That's the nice thing about democracy it's flexible enough to become a ship we built to wreck. And voters are empowered enough to sink themselves if they so wish. So I question what freedom is not present currently that you lament the lack of?

but he's the only one who explicitly showed that, like donating each month his salary (funded by taxes) and not funding certain political campaigns

Yeah, that's not the altruism that it looks like. He's ultimately picking who is getting that money of his. He's picking which campaigns to not find funding. That's the point, not the money part the power part. The money part is one thing, the power part is something that one would be ill advised to lose sight of.

Citizens has no direct influence in the process of decision politicians make

They're not made to. Citizens have oversight and challenge on the wisdom of representatives. It would be unwise to have 500,000 peoples' hands on the steering wheel. There's no one direction we would be going in then.

The term "slave" is not valid because those workers voluntary agreed, in a contract, the amount of money they'd get to do certain job

When the choice is "go hungry" or "work" that's hardly voluntary. You will find it hard to convince me otherwise.

but accusing him of fascist? It does not make any sense.

If you read though my comments, at no point did I indicate him as fascist. Authoritarian, yes. He's looking to consolidate power to himself to enact change unilaterally, that's authoritarian. Not every authoritarian is fascist but it is important to understand the fertile ground such leaves for the future. Lenin didn't invent Stalin but he sure opened the door. And that's something to consider.

Our study supports current dietary recommendations for limiting consumption of red meat intake and emphasizes the importance of different alternative sources of protein for T2D prevention.

I think there's going to be lots of people who get on here and think this study says "eat no red meat" or even "eat no meat". But that is not what is being said. The recommendation for red meat intake is:

Limit consumption to no more than about three portions per week. Three portions is equivalent to about 350–500g (about 12–18oz) cooked weight.

Which is quite a bit of red meat to begin with. So if you're eating above that rate, that's a pretty intense rate of consumption. You should really diversify your diet. We already know that high rates of red meat is responsible for colorectal cancer so that T2D also comes with it shouldn't be a surprise for anyone.

At no point is any researcher indicating anyone swap over to Vegan. The World Cancer Research Fund indicates:

This Recommendation is not to completely avoid eating meat. Meat can be a valuable source of nutrients, in particular protein, iron, zinc and vitamin B12. However, eating meat is not an essential part of a healthy diet.

The highlight is mine, but the point is that red meat is not a requirement for a healthy diet. Like anything, too much of any ONE thing is not good for anyone. I think the red meat eaters of the world look at all of this as an attack on their way of life and that's hardly the case. Red meat is a good source for various nutrients, but the rate that "SOME" eat it at is unhealthy and that's what really needs to be put into check.

And it's not just the "if I eat 24oz of meat, I need to exercise extra", that just takes care of the caloric value, but that doesn't address the nitrosylation of cell walls by nitroso compounds formed by the ingestion of red meat. Your body is setup to take a particular amount of this kind of damage (humans are omnivores after all) but continually doing it means malformed cells that could become cancer get more chances for expression. No amount of exercise rebuilds that cellular lining just like no amount of exercise rebuilds lung tissue damaged by smoking. Only time fixes that.

I myself stay away from red meat as a personal choice, but I think everyone should have that choice. But I think it's important to note there's an upper bound of red meat humans can eat and there's a lot of humans that are eating between ten to twenty times that amount. Like, I get it red meat eaters, you really like red meat, by all means continue onward, but I think it is important to consider for a moment how far over 18oz/wk cooked weight some go. I myself eat 0 oz/wk, but I know that's not for everyone, but I also know that 18oz/wk is just unsustainable.

I don't want to take anything away from anyone, I just ask that the red meat eaters keep the amount they ingest in their mind. Colorectal cancer is something I would wish on no one (as I've seen some family members die of it), and if there is something that I can encourage anyone to do to lessen their chances of getting it, I would highly recommend being mindful of it.

We were just warming it back up for ya!

Let's solve "economic inequality" with more statism!

I can vote the State, I can't vote the CEO.

Obviously, wanting to reduce the monopolical privileges of politicians

That's the citizens job, not his. Milei just wants to reduce the privileges of those disagreeing, at no point would Milei want to reduce the privileges that allows him to unilaterally reduce the political privileges of those opposed to him. Let him actually put forward something that actually indicates that HE wants less power and we'll talk about this aspect.

public spending and taxes

Again it's the citizens that dictate that. I can vote for people wanting to build something in the State, not a CEO that wants to build a highway for the goodwill of mankind.

erradicating the central bank

Nobody wants to be the "bad guy". Many nations are suffering the fate of too long supportive monetary policy without fiscal policy to follow. Same can be said about the USA. They rode too high and too far on quantitative easing at some point the party ends and nobody likes being "that guy". Again, that's mostly on the backs of the capricious voters who don't like mild inconveniences so they hold out for major ramifications. And why? There's way less disposable income in the hands of the many. So literally any inconvenience is a massive blow to their way of life. And it shouldn't be a hard guess for you to figure out why so many in the public have so little.

increasing work flexibility and advocating for individual rights and liberty

Every "work flexibility" I've ever seen pitched is just code for turning people into wage slaves. Sort of how like the UK got a lot of "trade flexibility" with Brexit. Once I've seen a working example that didn't actually fuck everyday citizens over, we'll talk.

As for individual rights and selling organs. I'm actually cool with that. There's quite a list of incredibly wealthy people I'd like to exercise those rights on.

fascist af

It's just that every time I've seen someone purpose breaking the system to make it better, they just want to break the system so that they can profit. I literally expect nothing less from Milei. This is the age of grift, why should anyone believe any one who pitches "I swear, I'll build something better, just first give me the power to destroy every protection you have first." Sure buddy, sure you will.

Economic inequality being one of the biggest drivers of democratic back sliding. Shitty part is that authoritarian doesn’t really offer anything better.

The wealthiest people of this world have created a world that’s tearing itself apart. And their only hedge is the thought that we will all be too busy killing each other that we forget completely about them. Hence these megalomaniacs that appear as distraction to keep us fighting each other.

Yeah, logo is there. From BestBuy site.

it’s a measurement of expected length of rigidity for the structure.

Okay so you're here to troll, alright.

In about:config see if setting widget.use-xdg-desktop-portal to true does anything for you.

If that's what they want who am I to tell them no? The point of open software is to be what the user wants. Why is any particular opinion more correct than another within a group that prides itself on giving users choice.

If KColorPicker isn't someone's cup of tea, there is nothing stopping anyone from changing that default out. The color picker that appears is a user setting.

Do you actually use Linux? The purpose of FOSS is to make it whatever you want it to be. It can be a step away, a step towards, a step multiple by the square root of negative one to MS Windows. The entire point is that you get to dictate the path you want to take.

Huge ripoff, nothing special

Okay then don't use it. The entire point of KDE is to provide a traditional desktop metaphor that windows users find friendly.

And if you're especially irked, KDE like most FOSS is somewhat community driven, so be the change you desire if that's your kind of thing. Or don't do anything but complain. You're completely free to do whatever.

But that said, you may perhaps be making a mountain out of a molehill, especially UI elements that if MS wanted to cite copyright, they would have done it long time ago. This has been the default color picker for KDE since the 2.x days.

Unsustainable state subsidies are not capitalism. Remember it’s not just the Chinese that do this kind of stuff.