rekabis

joined 1 year ago
[–] rekabis@programming.dev 1 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

It’s more than just Democrats, it’s society in general.

You can’t enlist the support of an entire gender by telling them that they are the source of all of society’s evils, and that they themselves are fundamentally evil no matter what, that they are all rapists-in-training, that the world would be better off if they were all killed, and that they are no better than vermin. And more importantly: that when they do something objectionable it is misogyny and bigoted and disgusting and (with some things) even illegal, but when women do it, it is a big nothingburger with zero consequences for the woman.

That’s how you alienate them and push them away.

And the alt-right has stepped in with comforting lies.

Is it any wonder that men have turned away from the left? There is absolutely no visible benefit for them there. So they have gone to where they are openly wanted and desired, where they are intentionally made to feel useful and valued… even though they are just pawns in a class war (Parasite Class vs working class), and will only ever be hurt by those they support.

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 56 points 1 week ago

“If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.”

- David Frum

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (3 children)

I created a bunch of blogs myself, did all of the development and design myself, managed the servers myself, and wrote all of the content myself.

Sure sounds like labour to me.

And there is no requirement for labour to generate income immediately. A majority of labour is front-loaded, with income being back-loaded.

I still have one of them, and I receive around $60 per month from it despite the fact that I haven't touched it in over a decade.

Server maintenance and updating code to work with current releases is still “labour”. Because sure as shit you’ve been doing these things… no hosting provider is going to let you go 10 years with zero updates or patches to the website or the underlying framework that allows the website to run. Because failing to do that is how entire hosting platforms get rooted and infected with malware.

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 0 points 2 weeks ago

There are plenty of programs out there which can end up being required for your workflow - as in, that exact program; no exceptions - and yet, have no Linux or even non-Windows version.

Not everything is a platformm-agnostic subscription-based SAAS yet, nor should that ever be the case.

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 8 points 4 months ago

Also not super enthused about another browser written in C++. I skimmed some of their code and it seems pretty high quality, but still… this is going to be chock full of security bugs.

If you are going to do anything stability-based these days, Rust should be a big consideration.

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 24 points 4 months ago (6 children)

We don't have anyone actively working on Windows support, […] We would like to do Windows eventually, but it's not a priority at the moment.

As much as I applaud this focus on just one broad OS architecture, as it will greatly speed development, leaving out Windows is likely to cut off 85-90% of all early adopters. I just hope that the benefit of a simplified target will outweigh ignoring the vast majority of the market.

And honestly, methinks they should focus on Haiku OS before Windows, as it is closer to a Unix heritage than Windows is. And Haiku OS desperately needs a native modern web browser with all the bells and whistles.

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 1 points 10 months ago

when there's a portion of people basically saying you're scum for being born a man

There is no way of changing these people’s minds, they invariably tend to be zero-sum absolutionists. Any attempt to prove them otherwise will only trigger their victimization complexes.

The only effective strategy is to not engage in the first place, to avoid having anything to do with them even if they are blood and especially if they can be easily avoided.

Unfortunately, this attitude is also held by the vast majority of vocal feminists… which, if you are actively dating, ought to make this one of the first red flags you should be looking for to make women self-select themselves out of contention.

After all, you don’t want to be with someone who hates you for what you are. Leave those venomous vipers on the branch, where they belong.

And yes, this entire strategy works equally as well in the other direction, for women. The difference is that women are far more effectively avoiding men with these red flags than men are at avoiding women with these red flags. Far too many men are far too thirsty to think straight where women are concerned.

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 1 points 10 months ago

Girl, if this is the way you view the dating pool, then maybe MGTOW has a valid point or three to consider.

I may have stepped off the dating field nearly thirty years ago, but in terms of the gratuitous misandry that I have seen as of the last decade or so, even if I were to become widowed I doubt I would ever want to step back onto it. The juice is just not worth the squeeze if I am seen as “the enemy” and facing unjustified hostility and adversarial arrogance long before you even get to know me.

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 7 points 10 months ago (1 children)

~~our society is~~ manufacturers are completely drunk on plastic and ~~nobody~~ none of them gives a shit about its later life.

There, FTFY.

I would gladly choose products with low to no levels of plastic wrapping, but so many manufacturers insist on putting a 25g hardshell around so many damn products.

Even specialty bits for drills are vacuum-sealed onto a piece of cardboard. Like, FFS why not have a small bin hanging on the pegboard with the bits inside? Is there some need to hang every piece individually?

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 5 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Plus, current climate change has seen a velocity across a mere century that prior events took tens of thousands of years to achieve.

This imparts an “inertia” to our current climate that - even if we stopped on a dime, right now - will lead to conditions that may have most of the planet outside of the polar regions as being uninhabitable year-round due to chaotic weather and lethally high wet bulb temperatures that AC is simply unable to handle.

And if we don’t stop; if we continue on our “business as usual” path for another 10 or 20 or 30 years, said inertia could conceivably push the entire planet over into a full-blown Venus Scenario, wiping all life from the face of the planet.

Warming trails CO2 by 15-20 years. We are now seeing the 1.5℃ of warming of 2003, when Windows XP was released. If we hit CO2 levels that predict 5℃ of warming, humanity has essentially dug its own grave, the planet will (once warming catches up) no longer have any carrying capacity for us to survive in sufficient numbers. If we hit CO2 levels that predict 8-10℃, we run a non-trivial possibility of a tip-over into a Venus Scenario.

Prior events took many tens to hundreds of thousands of years, allowing entire ecosystems to migrate to and from the poles. This allowed the biosphere to “put the brakes on” warming itself because they never stopped being robust sequesters of CO2.

We don’t have that in play, here. Entire ecosystems will die in-place because they simply don’t have the time to migrate. We will see extinctions on a scale never before seen in the geological record. And the very robust biosphere that saved the planet in prior warming events will be commensurately weakened in this one, likely to the point where it cannot effectively sequester sufficient CO2 to stop the warming.

TL;DR: as a species, the likelihood that we are all endlings is uncomfortably high. Humanity may not see the year 2100, and will most likely not see the year 2200.

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 2 points 10 months ago (3 children)

The idea of climate change violates scripture of all three Abrahamic faiths. So the truly faithful will reject the idea of climate change wherever it is mentioned on ideology alone.

The science of climate change has also been adopted by “the left”, so the political right must stridently oppose its existence it wherever it is mentioned, on principle alone.

That’s a majority of the population, right there, that will openly reject climate change in every way right up until it starves or kills them.

[–] rekabis@programming.dev 18 points 10 months ago

When you deny reality, I guess any kind of statement sounds reasonable.

view more: next ›