naught @ naught @sh.itjust.works

Posts

0

Comments

559

Joined

2 yr. ago

I think it's extremely hard to justify violence other than in very clear cases of absolute self-preservation. I think the system needs to change and that the SC is anti-democratic. However, we are excusing/advocating for terrorism here. The aim is a policy change through violence or the threat thereof.

Fair enough - I figured you were drawing comparisons. Regardless in this case, I say, no matter which Justice this maniac was threatening, his actions are wrong. Period.

It's disheartening to read so many rabid comments from people who I otherwise probably agree with on most things. I usually see that kind of bloodthirstiness from a different kind of person.

It's not just about the double standard, it's about right and wrong. If we abandon our morals at the first sign of adversity, then what do we stand for? How can I stand for democracy if I'm okay with the life being snuffed from those who disagree with me. That's not democracy. There is no room for political violence

What? Do you really think that? Where does this end? Can he kill a doctor if his wife died in childbirth due to the doctor's negligence? Can he kill his local mayor who slashed fire & rescue budgets if his wife dies in a fire? You're describing revenge, retribution. It's toxic. It's insane. Imagine a Trumper making this argument about immigrants or something stupid like that.

The system is constantly changing. We have the power and tools to effect change, despite the recent backsliding. SCOTUS is corrupt, yes, but we should be trying to change it, not making fucking deranged phone calls threatening people's lives

Ah yes Brett Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas. They will surely be remembered amongst the likes of Hitler. How many lives have you cost vs saved? Can you possibly know? Should I call in death threats to anyone I personally judge to have a negative effect on the world? Where do you draw the line? WHO gets to draw the line?

This is insanity

Im the last person to approve of SCOTUS. Does that mean I think it's ever right to call in death threats to like, anyone? Absolutely fucking not. I think it's truly insane that anyone here is entertaining this. Imagine (well, you don't really have to) the "other side" doing this shit. It would be reprehensible, just like this bullshit. Hell, for all we know it was a "liberal" justice getting threats and suddenly our opinion on this situation changes? Screw that.

Two wrongs and all that. Eye for an eye... surely there is some simple saying that makes this easy to understand

Shit take. Anyone calling in death threats is ethically bankrupt at the very least. What justice is there in murder?

Is it??? Anyone calling public servants with death threats I'm gonna go ahead and disagree with

The level of self awareness in the idubbz apology blew my mind. I was an edgy teen and grew out of him, and while it took him a bit longer than me, he came around too. Was a weird and cool moment.

America has Zelle which does instant money transfers by email/phone. It's private but it works in my banking app, is totally free, and is instant

Tbf, it's typically language servers and extensions causing cpu and memory footprints. If you were to open a dumb txt file, I doubt you'd encounter issues. The app itself is pretty light. I say this as a neovim user who has managed to make its memory footprint balloon ^_

React is fine too with the right tooling. Next.js, create-t3-app, vite etc. are all nice. I think svelte has fewer unfamiliar mental models and hurdles to initial development though. I tried vue years ago and found react made far more sense to me for some reason.

I support u

The musical numbers are also great

I get what you're saying. Are you saying also that you haven't ever encountered anyone using the term as a pejorative? My original reply is earnestly asking what was meant because the original post was ambiguous to me. I'm talking about connotation and you're talking about the textbook definition. I know what a scripting language is, and it's pretty dismissive to say otherwise imo. To call JS and Python scripting languages puts them up there with bash, lua, and perl. Interpreted or not, do you think these languages are equal? Can a developer as easily create a fully featured app or website equally with all of them? Can you land a perl job as easily as a JS one? I don't think so. It's not a matter of bruised ego so much as I want to combat the notion, especially for newer developers, that JS and Python and friends are somehow less-than, whether or not that was the original intent of the post.

I'd say touch grass but they'd probably yell me off their lawn

I'm merely saying that to me, and to probably a large group of devs, it sounds like a dig. I totally take that it is an appropriate designation and there was no ill intent though. I think the fact that we're having this conversation is enough to prove that there is at least a little ambiguity given the right context and experience with the term. Cheers

I'm certainly replying from my own perspective! Again, I don't think the original reply was intended to be negative. I am just discussing the language used and what it implies to me and perhaps others from a similar background and time. I think, to me, a clearer and more modern way to describe these languages is as "interpreted" or other words describing the nature of the languages rather than saying it is a language for scripting, which carries a connotation (at least to me, in my corner of the internet)

If someone on the internet calls something a "scripting language," it's hard to take that in a vacuum. I'll accept that there is overlap between "interpreted" and "scripting" languages, but they aren't synonymous, particularly in my experience interacting with developers online. The typical discourse does indeed trivialize the so-called scripting languages, and my only intent is to say that they are a lot more than what they began as.

It was for you, too (っ^_)っ