Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)WR
Posts
0
Comments
93
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • No, it would have added clarity because it would show that the kid on the right is prevented from going to the left side, which is a necessary assumption for the given metaphor to work.

    However, that would make it obvious what the real problem and the solution is. Which would be detrimental to the political message the comic is trying to push, because then instead of giving assistance (putting up boards to move the tree), the obvious solution would be removing something (the literal and metaphorical barrier). The author clearly intended to show that providing assistance is justice, not removing barriers.

    It's a disingenuous comic, because equity and "justice", while appearing differently in the comic, in practice would be exactly the same thing.

    Besides, anyone portraying their position as "justice" is a massive red flag.

  • The OP comment did not criticize the comic for being too simple. He called it misleading. You're both arguing with a strawman.

    Someone disagreeing with something doesn't mean they didn't understand it. It's a really poisonous mindset that hampers intellectual discourse and development.

  • You can't criticize people for using the word handicapped after it has been pushed as the politically correct word for decades.

    It's still the mainstream politically correct word in the English speaking West. Using disabled can land you in hot water in a professional or political environment.

  • It's about making sure you can both access a guitar and lessons to learn.

    We are already trying to do that. It's called equality. Also known as equality of opportunity, where everyone has access to acquire a guitar and guitar lessons. How does "justice" augment this?

  • Yes. Stop covering them unless they actually do something of importance to the public.

    I could not care less about what dumb shit Musk said. To me it has no more weight than what a random person on a bus stop says.

    Actually here's the benchmark, if it's something that wouldn't be covered if it was said/done by a random man on the street, then don't cover it if it's said/done by musk.

  • They already can't. They just rely on the assumption that most of the data they collect is correct. Which is generally true, there is more correct than incorrect content on the internet. The inability of the bots to discern incorrect data coupled with their ability to make it sound authoritative is what makes them dangerous.

  • Posing Brave as an alternative to Chrome is ridiculous. It's a crypto scam company that intends to profit from advertising. And they have been caught inserting referrals into url suggestions.

    Don't know why you think Edge is better either. Microsoft is no more your friend than Google and they have every intention to collect as much data as possible.

    If you want chromium, use a build of un-googled chromium. You don't need to replace one evil with another if you can just rip it out altogether.

  • Why not install GrapheneOS since you already have a pixel. It's better privacy and security than either a stock pixel or an iPhone.

    Going from Google to Apple because of the DRM push from Google doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Apple is at the frontline when it comes to proprietary hardware and software. You won't even be able to use Firefox on an iPhone, you'd be locked into Safari.

    All 3rd party browsers on the app store are mandated to just be wrappers around Safari's engine. If Apple decides to adopt the web DRM, you will have no choice but to support it.

  • Okay, someone gains access to your device and sends themselves the NFT that proves ownership of your house.

    What do you do? Do you just accept that since they own the NFT, that means they own the house? Probably not. You'll go through the legal system, because that's still what ultimately decides the ownership. I bet you'll be happy about middle men and "waiting 45 days to close" then.

  • Java

    Jump
  • To avoid a type conversion that might not be expected. Integer math in Java differs from floating point math.

    Math.floor(10.6) / Math.floor(4.6) = 2.5 (double)

    If floor returned a long, then

    Math.floor(10.6) / Math.floor(4.6) = 2 (long)

    If your entire code section is working with doubles, you might not like finding Math.floor() unexpectedly creating a condition for integer division and messing up your calculation. (Have fun debugging this if you're not actively aware of this behavior).

  • Java

    Jump
  • You don't have to use inheritance with Java. In fact, in most cases it's better that you don't. Practically all of the Java standard library doesn't require the use of inheritance, same with most modern libraries.

    On the contrary, I think inheritance is a very natural way to think. However, that doesn't translate into readable and easy to maintain code in the vast majority of the cases.

    I am not sure what you mean by how it's stored or manipulated on a computer. A garbage collected language like Java manages the memory for you. It doesn't really care if your code is using inheritance or not. And unless you're trying to squeeze the last drops of performance out of your code, the memory layout shouldn't be on your mind.