I know it doesn’t tick the boxes but there technicality is a Microsoft made, open source, alternative to Explorer. The original File Manager for Windows 3.1 and it is still seeing active development. Just thought to bring it to attention for a bit of nostalgic fun but I actually find myself using it a fair bit.
vscode extension that summarizes Java’s exceptions for me so that I can easily find what’s wrong and which line caused it instead of scrolling through 100 lines of exception/error stack.
I went from Liftoff to a few others, but I’m really feeling at home in Summit.
It’s pretty good as is and the dev is very responsive and updates fairly often with improvements and keeps an ongoing roadmap of future updates.
Connect was good and better looking then Liftoff or Summit, but I post every day and make some really long posts, and Summit just has awesome features and a pretty good workflow for that.
Boost has finally fixed its post UI to be useful. I used this for Reddit, so I originally started on Liftoff for Lemmy since I expected it to be a Boost copycat.
Sync was ok but not for me.
Landscape works in Summit, and I run in Dark Mode. Says it supports multiple accounts, but I haven’t tried, I spend all my time on one instance anymore.
Had a ton of settings and everything is pretty customizable. I’m very happy here after 5 months on Liftoff.
I know the intent. Remember visiting the parents for the first time? What a nightmare that was. The one highlight was furious fucking in the bathroom while everyone watches wrestling or some dumb shit
Constantly moving targets don’t help. CSS, HTML, and JavaScript add new features way too quickly. Between supporting new shiny stuff and crusty old stuff there’s so much bloat to keep up with. It’s taking huge efforts to design and tune these rendering engines, so there are only a handful of efforts now backed by major players (Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Mozilla). Even Microsoft threw in the towel on their own engine and started using Google’s Chrome because it was cheaper and easier.
Most Americans aren’t interested or even capable of fighting in a civil war. When you live paycheck-to-paycheck, you’re not going to abandon your family to fight on the front lines.
And a huge percentage of Americans live paycheck-to-paycheck.
Bingo. If Texas tried to leave, a HUGE chunk of the population would revolt against the State of Texas. Many more would just leave. Very little good would remain.
You’re wrong though. The general public is more likely to engage in civil unrest when they’re struggling. The reality though is that while many Americans might be living paycheck to paycheck, they’re not poor and not struggling. They are just bad at managing their finances and they have a lot to lose.
If you have more to lose than to gain, you won’t participate in a civil war. But when you’re a slave working in a cotton field, you have nothing to lose, only something to gain.
The idea that your average American is so poor is just laughable.
over half a million live on the streets. flat out homeless. and then, the working poor, which you are if you live paycheck to paycheck. also, if you can’t live unless you work, you’re the working class.
Either you’re being purposefully deceitful, or you have a horrible understanding of macroeconomics. But please, let’s just continue to ignore the elephants named record-inflation, rent records and housing crisis in the room.
There is a term for this called the “Valley of revolt” basically a people need enough empowerment to revolt but not enough to feel heard.
Also it’s not necessarily just “bad with finances” it’s that our expected standard of living doesn’t match our actual standard of living. Rising cost and stagnant wages and all that.
I don’t see how the national guard isn’t already federal, it’s the national guard, not the state guard. They get called up just like regular military for wars.
Cut off their money, court martial them, dishonorable discharge, take away their guns and vehicles. These belong to the military, not Texas.
The national guard is part of the military, so funded and supported by the feds. Unlike normal army units though, each state or territory has its own national guard unit under the command of the governor. The intention is to give each state the power to quickly respond to emergency situations without needing federal approval. They’re the successors to the old state militias, but have much stronger federal ties now.
They swear allegiance to the federal constitution, the governor, and the president. With the president being CIC and having power over the governor and the constitution having power overall. So in theory, the governor cannot give you orders that defy the president, and not even the president can give force you to comply with an unlawful order. It would take some serious stones to defy orders though
National Guard listens to the state by default, as each state has its own National Guard. However, the federal government can intervene at any time and give them new orders.
I guess they’re just choosing not to do anything? IDK.
That same separation is what prevented Trump from sending in the national guard to Detroit and Oregon just because he disagreed with the protests there.
The intent to give the peoples of the state further say in the use of force in the state.
Honestly I think the best means for changing things is right under our noses: voting. Not just federal, but also state and local. As it is now, in most places tax cuts that flow mostly to the wealthy are still a great political move that’s an easy way to get votes. That’s the first thing that needs to change.
There’s all kinds of groups like the Center for Tax Reform and the US Chamber of Commerce that push for policies that tend to increase financial inequality - but as far as I know there isn’t one for reducing inequality. Given how many people recognize the problem, maybe there should be one. And then politicians can start to fear that group as much as they fear the others. Of course it won’t have a lot of wealthy donors, but as some politicians have shown small donations can do a lot.
Voting doesn’t change anything when billionaires can be easily lobbied. Just look at what happening in France, it is not the US as there are some rules against it but politicians are doing exactly what billionaires want them to do. French people are against those laws in favor of the rich but the gouvernement doesn’t care.
Xenophobia and racism are not related. Xenophobia is about foreigners regardless of race, and racism is about race regardless of nationality. The two get mixed in the head of people from the USA because a lot of guys claim they’re Irish or Italian without ever having set foot in any of those countries. If you dislike your [insert ethnicity] neighbour who was born and grew up in the same place as you did, you’re being racist. If you dislike your [insert nationality] neighbour who’s the same ethnicity as you, you’re being xenophobic.
-phobia means an irrational intolerance, for a lot of things we express intolerance by showing fear, but to others we show aggressiveness. It depends more on the person than the subject matter, some homophobics are actually afraid of gays, thinking they’ll corrupt the children or whatever stupid fearmongering propaganda they’re up to these days, meanwhile some arachnofobics will kill every spider they see. And their line of thought is often quite similar, e.g. I don’t hate [gays/spiders], I just don’t want to see them.
I lived in Rhineland-Palatinate when I was young and I remember asking my neighbors why every Saturday they all came out to trim their grass and sweep their sidewalks and gutters clean. They said it was to show that they are not French.
It’s not a serious hatred, but most major/Western European nations (at least Germany, UK, Spain, Italy and probably France themselves) have at least a friendly rivalry with the French despite being on friendly terms either since 1945 or even longer, with France having been fairly positive for Europe since at least the 80s, so it’s incredibly hard to justify that the “hatred” of them is rational
Although the Italians may have twisted it into a surprisingly valid case, just ask about how almost all famous French food is just Italian recipes with a French name and they will be incredibly convincing even if it may not be objective fact
He’s racist, “African-American” means black, i.e. an ethnicity not a nationality, he doesn’t mind Africans because they’re not near him. A similar thing for a xenophobe would be I have no problem with Mexicans, it’s the Mexican immigrants I hate. Or from an aracnophobe: I understand spiders have their place in nature, I just don’t want them in my house.
One of the main issues is the lack of competition. There are now only 3 main browser engines, Blink, Gecko and WebKit. Blink (which poses Chrome and Edge) is by far the largest, and has a the enormous marketing might of Google (and Microsoft to a lesser extent) behind it. WebKit runs Safari, which only runs on Apple platforms and arguably only has the market share it does is because Apple doesn’t allow other browser engines to run on iPhones and iPads. Gecko, the engine of Firefox, continues to slide into irrelevance (which pains me to say as a long time Firefox user).
We are in real danger of the web being trapped in a browser monoculture again, like the dark dark times of Internet Explorer’s dominance. This led to a period of stagnation in web technology Microsoft at the time put little effort into developing IE. Allowing Blink/Chrome to do the same will likely be just as damaging, albeit in different ways - particularly for privacy on the web.
For the good of the web no one company should ever be in the position to dictate web standards, which is why we need a healthy and competitive marketplace of web browsers and browser engines. The problem is that web standards have now become so complex developing an indecent browser engine is now a monumental task. Opera gave up on Presto, once the poster child for browser innovation. Microsoft, a company with far more resources, gave up on Trident. Mozilla was developing a new generation browser engine called Servo, but gave up on the project also.
people around me are starting to realize that firefox is the go-to browser nowadays. my dad has actually been using it since he bought his current computer. and i’ve switched back from opera gx due to concerns of me being in a walled garden of advertisement.
The big issue is that by adding more and more features, a browser has become an operating system and so complex that you can’t hope to make a new one from scratch.
The last “new” browser engine (that wasn’t built by a corporation) was KHTML which was stolen harvested first by Apple for Webkit and subsequently by Google for Blink. KHTML then rotted without support.
The most recent attempt was to build Servo in Rust. Mozilla “ran out of money” (they depend on Google for their existence), and it’s already rotting.
Think the DSM term for that is “harmless self-delusion” bc ain’t nobody throwing that sock away. Goes in the laundry hamper, and we repeat the ciiircle of…. Oh wait. You know what i mean.
There was a time, years ago when I was a bachelor and had more disposable income than I had any idea what to do with. I decided which brand of sock I liked and I bought 50 pairs at least. I threw away every pair of white socks I owned. I had a good solid run, 50 days of brand new socks. I did an entire laundry run a little bleach and 49 pairs of socks. I got him out of the dryer there I was with 47 pairs of socks. If any of the socks got a hole or a serious stain I had so many of them I just threw them away no regrets. They were all the same socks so it didn’t matter if I lost one. Eventually through magic sock demons and probably some washer and dryer attrition, The horde dwindled. I got down into the '30s. They were starting to get a little ragged. I eventually went and bought another couple packs. I don’t feel bad about torching socks though It’s my guilty pleasure.
Yes!! This is the way. It’s so nice to have a ton of matching socks and not running out of clean ones frequently. I do the same with underwear and have found that I end up having to do laundry way less frequently using this strat
From what I’ve heard, the supreme court decision was mostly about the feds having access to the border, and the ability to cut down the razor wire, rather than any specific opposition to the razor wire existing in and of itself. I would wager this whole deal is mostly just a kind of political play, to try and egg biden into doing something stupid, while simultaneously keeping up the appearance that everyone at the head of these states is doing something dangerous, anti-institutional, and counter-cultural, even though they’re all kind of inherently unable to do anything along those lines just as a matter of their positions.
Everybody’s correct when they say that the political divides in this country are less clear-cut, but I also don’t think that the radicalization that we’ve seen, as a matter of perspective from being in online space, necessarily reflects reality. I think if you look at most people, most people want social security of some kind, and want healthcare of some kind, and want drug legalization of some kind, and want us to stop fighting wars in some form. Those are all kind of generalities, because the specific mechanism by which people want those things achieved differs from person to person. It’s very fractured as a matter of course, as a matter of how our political system and society is set up, and the ruling class has taken advantage of this to enact a divide and conquer strategy, where they can selectively promote whatever ideological positions benefit them the most, and cordon everyone off into a relatively small set of solutions over which they have a high amount of control. Rather than, you know, what a good democracy might do, which is come to a compromise solution, that everyone but the most extreme propagandized radicals might be kind of okay with. There is a reason why lots of conservatives like communism, as long as you use the right words. Both parties attempt to be mostly “populist” parties. This is all kind of obvious, right, but people understate the degree to which it’s a deliberate thing, and the overstate the degree to which it’s been successful, you know, which isn’t surprising, because, again, serves the interests of the powerful. People aren’t, broadly, morons, people have realized that this is all the case. That’s mostly what the “radicalization” that you’ve seen online has been, people just realizing that they hate these shitass solutions that aren’t really compromise solutions. See how everyone is cripplingly disappointed with the democratic party, and also how, likewise, conservatives are consistently disappointed with their own party, as well, and for many of the same reasons, barring the extreme radicals.
Most people are focused on how the internet divides people into radicalized swaths and conspiracy theorists, which is true, but even the mainstream monopolized internet is kind of a good tool for mass mobilization. See the occupy movement and the arab spring for older examples, for more recent examples, maybe the george floyd protests, or the french retirement protests. The only risk of these is kind of that they more easily get co-opted as a result of their visibility, i.e. “defund the police” gets turned into an argument for “fund the police”. If you were an asshole, you could cite charlottesville, or jan 6th, for examples of internet mobilization, but those are relatively smaller scales of things, compared to the others, which were more popular, they just got disproportionate media attention relative to their size, and had disproportionate political effects.
I think if we’re looking at the true, extreme political radicals, we’re seeing them come about as a result of a kind of well-oiled engine. I’m not gonna say that this is an institutional kind of thing, and it’s maybe more of a third level effect of active decisions, but it’s still something that, nonetheless, has been deliberately constructed. 4chan is funded by a japanese toy company and a hands off japanese internet techbro, and is administrated by some former american military freak who’s deliberately organized the site. The more radical offshoots, that use the same source code, tend to be funded by oil money, and political action committees, but through second-level effects, where they fund some small level conservative actor, and then they prop up the space. Which churns out some radical terrorists that are capable of your more fucked up bombings, and shootings, and controlled and coordinated protests. And then you kind of get military people at almost every level of this, in lower numbers, who act to control the space.
I dunno what I mean to extrapolate from all of this, but yeah. There’s probably not going to be a civil war.
Apologies, but too verbose and meandering to gain insight/understanding from (and I tried). Also, its murder trying to read that on a phone (vs PC monitor) to boot.
Appreciate the attempt though, thank you for that.
I don’t even come to a conclusion in the thing itself, but the tl;dr is basically just that this is all political farce, political theater, and the nature of the opposition’s control is too like. granular, too atomized, to be able to co-ordinate a large scale war. What we see instead are discrete “events”, discrete attacks, civil unrest which is corralled and channeled towards political ends by political powers. That’s what we see, we don’t see like, large scale organized institutional conflict, because the institutions are (mostly) all on the same side.
If you read the popular opinions around 1860, we have the same “we are right and we’ll show them” attitude building up in the new poor-people-and-women slave states.
The US Regular Army (RA) was founded in 1775. State militias supported the RA through the various wars fought on what is now US soil (including the Revolutionary War and the War of 1812). In the Civil War, the RA was supported by volunteers and fought on the side that ultimately won. The Confederate Army was similar to the RA at the time. Currently, the RA has been absorbed into the US Army (including Army Reserve and National Guard).
So… yes there was a federal military, but it was a different thing than the US Army is now. How that would play out if things went bonkers in 2025… who knows. There are a LOT of people around the world watching VERY closely though… and really hoping (not that confidently though) that sanity will prevail.
As far as I can tell, it’s a purple state. The right republican would have to come along to pull moderates/libertarians in the state and Trump will only lose the state again - he talked a lot of shit about John McCain; that’s not going to go well. Don’t get me wrong, every state has it’s Trump cultists, but there’s just not enough.
asklemmy
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.