Taywee

A sales tax of any sort can be avoided by not buying the product. I assumed nobody would misinterpret the common colloquial term "Apple tax" (meaning "Apple's much higher than typical profit margin"), which I didn't invent and has been used widely for a very long time.

I would love to be able to socket one of these suckers in a Linux desktop for a reasonable price. I'm loving seeing competition in this field, but I don't like using MacOS and don't want to pay the Apple hardware tax.

I think that exemplifies why the patent system should at the very least not have the same rules and terms for physical products as for software, if it should exist for software at all. The time and capital investments to start up are just so dramatically different.

And there's no point inventing anything as an established company if you can just aggressively buy IP and leverage existing property.

There's a balance to how much IP protection actually encourages innovation, and we're far on one side of it.

That's a pretty fragile and fault-prone method, and is extremely prone to typo squatting. I'm glad something like this isn't popular today, because it would very quickly be capitalized on by scammers, who wouldn't even have to rely on humans making typos anymore.

If it doesn't have error checking and checksums, it shouldn't be relied upon by the general public.

The cognitive dissonance of being a company that makes all its money spying on users, has a profit motivation to prevent others from spying on users, and needing to pretend to take the moral high ground for PR reasons at the same time.

You'd rather use explicit function calls for all linear algebra and geometry operations? I don't think adding two vectors using an overloaded + is that spooky or distant.

You still need to understand the code you are generating, testing, and debugging. LLMs don't replace a need for more expressive programming languages.

It's literally the definitions of the words:

> A reason or excuse given to hide the real reason for something.

> That which is assumed as a cloak or means of concealment; something under cover of which a true purpose is hidden; an ostensible reason, motive, or occasion; a pretense.

There has been legislation that wasn't bought. There has been legislation that just had huge public support without major industry lobbying. Lobbying is effective, but it's reductive and dishonest to pretend that it's the only way to make legislative change.

A lot of other compilers are the same way. gcc and g++ are higher level wrappers around their low level compiling and linking executables. It depends how you define the terms, including what you mean by "program".

This isn't 4chan. Cut down on the shitty snark.

It helps by putting more emphasis on growing things native to a region, rather than feeding the entire world on corn, rice, wheat, dairy, pork, beef, and chicken.

Those are reasonable approaches. You must interact with more reasonable conservatives than I do. The ones I interact with regularly tend to worship the rich and reject any approach that involves any change at all.

As far as "racial inequality" goes, it's loaded and difficult. I disagree with the common approaches I've heard on both sides (the left tends to push for an oversimplified hypercorrection, which causes different sets of problems). It's like cancer, in that it's often lumped into a single category, but it's actually a huge set of problems without a single solution. Most of the conservatives I've talked to reject that any inequality exists at all.

What you are talking about is what I'd really consider to be "true conservatism", but in my interactions, a lot of real life conservatives I've talked to sound more like 4chan trolls. Maybe I need to get out of this city.

That's not what the words mean. "pretext" and "pretense" both imply that there's a hidden purpose for something in the first place.

Using those words implies that the COVID lockdowns were created entirely for that purpose, and the stated purpose was a lie.

There really aren't, proportionally. Most of the cities are not reasonable to live in without owning a car.

And I'd rather if the bus was an option at all. The bus is expensive and unreliable in most US cities. Getting somewhere by car that takes 20 minutes can take hours by bus due to scheduling. This is a stark contrast to London, which has an actual public transit system.

Maybe I'm biased by living in Colorado Springs, where it might be particularly bad, but cities with sprawling suburbs are usually terrible for living without a car, and the US has tons of suburbs.

This isn't just my perspective from media, but from living in a city with a very conservative base (Colorado Springs). I've seen very little political action from conservatives that wasn't reactionary and to the tone of "actually, we don't want anything to change, anywhere at all, unless it means legally enforcing my religious ideals".

When it comes to major issues like "how do we handle this virus?" I haven't seen any answers at all from the right other than "we don't want anything the other side of the fence wants".

How does the right plan to handle many of the largest problems? Food monoculture? Environmental problems? Wealth inequality? Racial inequality?

I live in a pool of conservatism, and the answer is always "what's the problem? My life is good."

I think most people would be happier if they could drive less and had fewer cars to contend with while walking.

Forcing people to be pedestrians would be likely a significant improvement for their health and quality of life.

As an American in a major city, the alternative sucks. I'm forced to be a driver, car costs eat a significant portion of my income, my neighborhood doesn't even have sidewalks between the residences and shops (which are across a highway that has a cross walk with no sidewalk leading up to it), and I end up having to drive at least 5 hours every week just to work and get my kids to and from school. This increases pollution in my city and comes with a regular risk of injury and death from a car accident, which is one of the leading causes of preventable death.

I'd rather be forced to be a pedestrian than a driver. Having the choice would really be great.

Yeah, I've got the same question, and I see the same trend in American political issues. There's an obvious problem, and the left-leaning want to try to solve it by either increasing power and control of one (usually governmental) group or decreasing the power and control of a group (like the police). The right leaning ones protest this desire, but tend to not provide any ideas or solutions at all. They claim the problem is unsolvable, or not a problem, or often that it doesn't even exist.

I get the paranoia, but where are your solutions? Wouldn't it be more effective to instead come up with a fix that you prefer?

> when the swivel-eyed loons claim that the COVID lockdowns were a pretense to control everyday people while rich people swanned around having a lovely time, they’re not entirely wrong.

I don't really believe that it's a "pretense" but rather that people in power tend to take every opportunity to keep and bolster their power and freedom and care less about the power and freedom of the already disadvantaged.

Something being leveraged for somebody's advantage doesn't mean that it was created for that advantage.

Implementing a subset of C or C++ as a scripting language is actually a lot of work, and is not fun to actually script in.

WebAssembly is pretty good at filling the same niche, but it takes a lot more work to interface between the guest and host than Lua.

I dislike 1-based indexing, but I also don't really care that much. In my experience, people react with disgust to it, then get used to it, and still prefer 0-based but discover that 1-based isn't all that much more awkward in practice.

You get used to it pretty quickly when the whole language is built around it.

I solved the immutable table thing by encoding my tables to CBOR in the canonical representation. The same table structure always encodes to the same CBOR. I did have to write my own CBOR encoder, though, because the existing art wasn't good enough.

Actually relying on panics for unwinding in any way is not encouraged in any way, and compiling with `panic = 'abort'` is really common, and completely removes all stack unwinding support.

They said "in theory", which is a contrast to "in practice".

Depends what you mean by "little things". If it's "a little thing that happened", then absolutely. If it's "a little thing that happens regularly", then it's worth discussing it before it snowballs.

8 billion humans as of last November.

I used to be the same way, but I've intentionally changed myself to fix it.

First, I don't treat my code as an extension of myself. My code is not me, and criticism of my code is not criticism of me.

I love a good solution, and I write good solutions, but all things created by humans are flawed, and therefore everything I make will be flawed. If somebody sees something I didn't, it's not because they're necessarily better than me (though they may be), but they have a different perspective. Often, it's something I would have seen if I was in their position and not so close to the code myself.

And because of this love for a good solution, I've trained myself to have a love for good criticism. Every piece of criticism is an opportunity. You are not perfect. You have room to grow and always will. Criticism is potentially a door to this room for growth.

Just internalize the mantra of self improvement. "I was wrong" is a wonderful thing. It means the same thing as "next time, I will be right".

You don't need snap. Follow the Pip instructions: https://certbot.eff.org/instructions?ws=nginx&os=pip

Or docker: https://eff-certbot.readthedocs.io/en/stable/install.html#ru...

If people want that badly enough under a FOSS license, there's nothing really stopping them from implementing it themselves, as an add-on or a fork of the BSD-licenced codebase.

If it's actually gated, not enough people care enough to get together and make and maintain a better one themselves.