antris

Oh really?

https://2021-2025.state.gov/countries-areas/taiwan/

>The 1979 U.S.-P.R.C. Joint Communique switched diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing. In the Joint Communique, the U.S. recognized the Government of the People’s Republic of China as the sole legal government of China, acknowledging the Chinese position that there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China.

https://2021-2025.state.gov/u-s-relations-with-taiwan/

>The United States approach to Taiwan has remained consistent across decades and administrations. The United States has a longstanding one China policy, which is guided by the Taiwan Relations Act, the three U.S.-China Joint Communiques, and the Six Assurances. We oppose any unilateral changes to the status quo from either side; we do not support Taiwan independence

Doesn't sound like silence to me.

>But, considering the laws we have on the books declaring our commitment to ensuring the sovereignty of Taiwan, it's a hard row to hoe to get to "the US considers Taiwan to be territory the PRC has a right to control."

You're moving the goal posts. Sovereignty isn't the same as being a country. States in the US have some sovereignty and their own governance and international relations too, but it wouldn't be correct to say that the US consists of 50 independent countries.

Also, using the word right sounds a bit like muddying the waters. You could argue the United States government doesn't have the right to control their land, as it has been stolen from the indigenous people. But that doesn't mean United States is not an independent country that controls the area within its borders.

How do you make one country into one country? It's already one country and is treated as such by even countries that consider China an adversary

Also, no source for claim.

Oh come on

Sure, but for beginner programmers who don't have the discipline down yet, it's unnecessarily hard. I bought a Java programming book as a kid and got stuck because of a typo that produced an error message I couldn't understand. This was the time before StackOverflow and Reddit. In retrospect, this delayed my programming journey by at least a year.

Longer Hello Worlds make frustration and getting stuck like this more likely.

Because they don't want to make jumping to the competitor too easy.

If you believe these rights are not important, that's your own opinion. But I think it's perfectly valid to criticize attacks on human rights.

Extraordinary rendition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition

Coups https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_r...

Wars https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_Uni...

Biden, when Trump arrives at White House: "Welcome home" https://www.yahoo.com/news/welcome-home-joe-biden-greets-160...

Also, in Germany the Nazi Party never got more than 43,91% of the votes in free elections. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_Party_election_results Hitler rose to power through the support of the "moderate" or "liberal" right wing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler%27s_rise_to_power

Also, being anti big pharma isn't the same as believing in conspiracy theories. You can't resist if you don't live in reality.

I'm pretty sure he'd have fell in line to the fascist insanity just like all other billionaires. He lived at the time of the height of neoliberal ideology, when most people believed in the conjured public images that the tech bro CEOs gave out in PR. Behind the scenes, things were quite different. Jobs has been reported to be petty, insulting and belittling of his employees

But before React came along, you just couldn't do this without major UX breaking bugs, because of how the DOM worked.

Say you have a form that you want to change depending on the state of the app. If the user is typing in a form field while an update to the app state comes, and a pure function that transforms (app state -> DOM/HTML output) resets the form (meaning removing the old out of state DOM and replacing it with the new DOM), the user loses focus on the form. So you have to add some kind of logic where the app remembers what form input the user was focused on, where in the field the focus was, etc. The more complex your app is, the more complex the DOM reset logic became, and you cannot abstract your way out of it with pure functions, because the DOM that relies on mutation slowly creeps into your pure functions anyway.

React changed this, because it gives you a pure function interface, but resets the DOM using mutation functions i.e. native DOM methods, surgically. This is achieved with the VDOM (Virtual DOM), by diffing VDOM states and then reflecting that to the actual DOM. This means when the DOM resets, there's no problem with elements getting removed and added back in, and the focus states etc. don't get thrown away with the DOM. Before React, nothing like this existed.

Oh, the horror

Yes, please. Hell, throw patents in too while you're at it.

I think this way of thinking is distracted. No type of media has ever been a source of truth in itself. Videos have been edited convincingly for a long time, and people can lie about their context or cut them in a way that flips their meaning.

Text is the easiest media to lie on, you can freely just make stuff up as you go, yet we don't say "we cannot trust written text anymore".

Well yeah duh, you can trust no type of media just because it is formatted in a certain way. We arrive at the truth by using multiple sources and judging the sources' track records of the past. AI is not going to change how sourcing works. It might be easier to fool people who have no media literacy, but those people have always been a problem for society.

Free isn't a synonym for good or legal.

I see, never heard of that term. Still wish there was a term that encompassed all software that has publically available source code. I thought "open source" was it. The literal meaning of the term aligns so beautifully with it.

So what is it if not "open source" on the scale between closed and open? "Half-open source"? "Leaked source" only refers to the way the source has initially began to be distributed, not whether it's open/closed right now.

I always thought that "open source" has nothing to do with what's legal and what isn't, it just means that anyone can materially access the code.

(Counter-Strike: Condition Zero)

Counter-Strike: Source

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive

Counter-Strike 2

It's all pretty confusing.