It’s hard to tell. There definitely was poor communication on the project level due to lack of a ticketing system. That led to him distrusting me and being rather open about it. There were also issues with the position itself. I was supposed to split time between development and monitoring a queue of deployment requests. If the coworker who normally handled those requests was getting behind, I was supposed to jump in. That involved breaking concentration every 15 minutes or so.
I regret not pushing back on the demands made of me. They were entirely unreasonable and could be mitigated. Unfortunately I didn’t know what to ask for and I didn’t have the maturity to identify what I even needed to push for.
Rereading the thread, I think we’re in agreement. I was more adding onto your point, that building strong institutions and norms is important along with political activism. Institutions and norms slow the rot from the inside, political action slow it from the outside.
Super-delegates had the their role in the nomination massively reduced, with no role whatsoever in the first round of voting. Bernie is not a viable contender at the moment because he represents only the left flank of the party. He’s also toxic in the general election. Praising Castro and honeymooning in the USSR just aren’t great things to have on a president’s resume.
The problem is that leaves you with an unstable situation under FPTP. Let’s say that our fictional third party, the Yellow Party, is to the point where 40% goes to Republicans (right), 30% goes to Democrats (center-left), and 30% goes to Yellows (left). Now Republicans are winning despite Democrats and Yellows forming a majority. So Democrats are going to split at some point, arriving back at an equilibrium of approximately a 50-50 split between Republican-Democrats and Democrat-Yellows. So in essence, you’re right back where you started.
I wouldn’t say that. The Democrats at least are pissed at the continued encroachment of Israeli settlers into the West Bank, which is making any sort of peaceful resolution more and more difficult. And anyone with familiarity in the situation knows that is by design of the genocidal and ethnic cleansing settler movement.
So make at least one of them a party with reasonable policies
Give them a voting base that they can do that with. You can disagree with policy all you want, but if the votes aren’t there then it’s hard for politicians to justify voting against their constituents. You’ll just get the present situation where a smattering of politicians support more left policies, but most Democrats are center-left.
Of course people care. That’s the lock-in.
Okay, but the problem is that those third parties have no chance of winning. If you deny the closest viable party your vote, they will just move rightward to try to capture votes they think they can feasibly win without alienating the middle. Stubbornly sitting in the extremes gets you little in situations where you have to compromise.
There’s already a movement fighting to change how we vote. Governmental bodies on the local and state level are experimenting with various options. It’s slow, quiet, and not very glamorous, but real progress is being made.
I’ve had a good experience with 1Password, but I would absolutely look at the others if I was starting from scratch now.
One I wouldn’t recommend is LessPass. It is kind of clever, but it relies on doing a hash of a set of values (master key + site + username + counter) and then producing a password from the hash based on some password specifications. Neat, but that’s a lot to remember.
My parents had a bed built for their minivan with ample storage and a thick layer of latex foam. They did some trips around the US using that, though ultimately it turns out they’re just not great sleepers.
I am glad you are enjoying it so far! It has a bit of a learning curve, but it has improved significantly since I was first getting into it in high school around 2004. Wow… already 20 years.