cocoricamo

No, this is a respect other entities rights commentary.

No, it's their money, they may as well burn it. Why should we care, we didn't earn it and we have no right to it.

It'd be different if we were talking about government funding. Companies and individuals can and should be able to do with their assets as they please.

I doubt that DHH somehow has an impact or even a say in that future fascist kleptocracy with some barely working linux distro, but if you really think that way and you think these actions do anything to damage it, you're incredibly wrong.

All you do is look like extremist weirdos and make moderates and people who couldn't care less about politics be interested in what they're doing. For every complaint I see about omarchy I see a ton from people that just heard about it and started using it, all after the whole DHH is the devil and omarchy is the fascist distro started, which is ironic and honestly hilarious.

Hyper-politicization of open source outside of its domain has ruined it. This is not a new phenomenon but has certainly increased as fringe politics have gone more mainstream and taken advantage by politicians, content creators and your average power hungry bully who wants to use idiots to obtain easy money and power.

Not capitalist but corporatist, where the government directs companies and unions to achieve what the state considers the common goal.

However I fail to see what this has to do with omarchy

Agree, but some people let their whole lives be controlled by whatever their political thinking is and attack whatever they see as different.

This just makes me want to support omarchy, not particularly because I like it or DHH, but because I hate bullies trying to make everyone do what they say.

There are shadow fleets of tankers trafficking oil across the world. Venezuelan oil is sanctioned as well as Iranian so no company without licenses and correct paperwork would touch it unless you move it enough to hide the origin. In the end they all know where it comes from but like the plausible deniability.

Most Venezuelan oil is very heavy and sour and needs to be mixed with lighter oil to be refined and they need access to restricted chemicals for the process. As it was explained to me a few months ago Iran provides lighter oil, solvents and materials for the refining and they take the heavier oil to sell it in the black market.

Sanctions aside the tanker was there for the taking by any government. Spoofing location and flying a false flag are enough to justify boarding and seizure by any country since it's a stateless ship likely involved in illegal activities.

In short yes, USA does it because it can and there's legal justification for it beyond "Trump oil, Trump bad lel", but as usual HN devolves to a potato when world events touch USA politics.

It wasn't apolitical, there were a lot of discussions about the nature and politics of OSS but it was never this radical.

I remember a few fights in a few of my local LUG and communities that were very heated, but never death threats and almost always was online trash talking and in real life going back to being normal people with some snarky comments here and there.

Always saw him as a commentator or blogger that wrote about Linux back in the day and not an actual developer, each have their place and OSS.

There are plenty of more politically motivated people that have no contributions on anything, haven't built a thing and all they do is preach OSS. Some lean left, others more to the right. Although I would say I've seem more leftists like this because there's this believe among many that OSS is socialist, but to each their own as long as they're not trampling on other people's rights.

The problem I see is with some of the crazy people becoming more and more emboldened and the moderate majority just there bending backwards to appease them as if in hopes that it will calm them down, but they just increase the threat level.

That's precisely the issue. There's a subset of the community that resorts to labeling anyone they deem guilty of wrongthink as a nazi or fascist and is the same crew that preach the "punch a nazi" line.

If it was just a normal exchange of ideas it wouldn't matter and DHH would be just whining, but first response was "he's a nazi" "lets take away his project".

There's crazier stuff in Lunduke's tweets from days ago including death threats and inciting violence against him on public events. I knew he was disliked by a large chunk of the OSS community but to threaten to kill people because someone attends a conference is crazy.

That is not the way to behave in a civilized society and is time people stop bending backwards to appease the lunatics otherwise there's no telling when any of us will be on the wrong end of the mob.

+100 social points

as you were comrade

Ridiculous. My bet is it won't go too far.

They're already starting with the wrong incentive which is not to improve the thing but to spite someone.

Because people are idiots and assholes. There are a bunch of radicalized idiots in FLOSS that want to impose their world view on everyone else and then have the balls to call anyone who disagrees fascist, nazi, or whatever term they can come up with.

It's like when they were adding caveats to licenses in the vein of "if you believe this or that then you cannot use my software because you're trash" (paraphrasing, but similar enough).

It's time we end up this shit. FLOSS is supposed to be about contribution and building something that's useful for all of us regardless of our political leaning. Instead we have assholes poisoning the well and idiots that follow them thinking that the monster they're creating is not going to eat them if they clap hard enough.

This comment will probably get flagged but whatever.

They just want to silence dissent and keep the discussion running only in their echo chambers.

You can disagree with someone politically and still work with them. It happens all the time in the real world unless you're someone so mentally ill that you cannot fathom different ideas (like actual nazis did wink).

Calling anyone who is conservative or with whom you happen to disagree with a "nazi" is disingenuous and in current times probably dangerous since there is a lot of crazy people preaching the "it's ok to punch a nazi".

Easiest example is defending antifa as just "wrongheaded" for using violence and attempting to suppress free speech and not a hate group while easily listing any other organization that opposes their political views as hate groups.

If you're claiming to fight extremism you should also fight extremists that support your political views.

Would be nice to be able to review the actual lists that they used.

Looks to me that right from the start the study has a fatal flaw and it's clearly biased.

Just looking at their channel selection is clear that they consider extremist only some forms extremism. Particularly those often considered as aligned with right wing politics.

From the Ledwich and Zaitsev paper they reference only the "white identitarian", "anti-sjw" and "men rights activism" categories are selected. But there are more categories that could be considered extremist at a glance like "revolutionary" and "anti-whiteness".

Other categories in Ledwich and Zaitsev's paper: Conspiracy, Libertarian, Anti-SJW, Social Justice, White Identitarian, Partisan Left, Partisan Right, Anti-theist, Religious Conservative, Socialist (Anti-Capitalist), Revolutionary, Provocateur, MRA (Mens Rights Activist), Missing Link Media, State Funded Channels, Anti-Whiteness. Some channels in other categories could be considered extremist but would require a nuanced analysis.

About the other lists or what actual channels they looked into I can't really say because I can't seem to find the actual list they used. If someone has the full list and categories they used please link it.

While it could be possible to analyze the behavior of extremism using only right leaning extremism, it is possible that this pattern does not apply to other forms or ideologies.

Younger kids could yield better results since they tend to take interest in adult stuff and will likely pay more attention than a teenager.

Main difference is that offering financing tools is not a crime, raping and murdering is. It's an apples to elephants comparison.

They're not victims. They knew the risks and decided to venture.

> ...I can't take it anymore, the guilt is eating me. I've had an affair with your wife...

[looks like whatever you're writing has already been written in this workspace]

> If the site turns into a cesspool and becomes unpleasant to be on,

That's already the case.

Do you mean disseminate? you wrote "decimate their message"

From an article published last month seems that with or without Elon a lot of people were still getting fired.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/10/20/musk-tw...

Twitter as a public company was a money pit. Now is Elon's money pit.

Too many people to list.

Although I'd say the tag kind of fits, but Bush is in another category. All the people I mentioned had in common the persecution, imprisonment and execution of their own people at a massive level and maintained power by force. Bush went after other countries and was voted out in the end.

They were almost the same in their practices, just happened to have different political ideas and better propaganda.

True, but from experience with family and former friends it's a prevalent trend with radicals (left, right, religious). It's not something I'd look forward to.

I guess it depends in exactly what they believe and how they think it should be achieved, since I've met people who were extreme in their positions, but capable of accepting others and staunch critics of their side.

Thinking about it, I guess the main difference with these two guys was that they didn't preach and were old as hell. Probably age earned wisdom, who knows.

It was a comment on the irony of their profile pictures.

It shouldn't be acceptable to glorify neither of: Hitler, Franco, Mussolini, Mao, Stalin, Fidel, Guevara, Hussein, Pinochet, Ceaucescu, Gaddafi, etc.

My point is that authoritarian murderers are authoritarian murderers no matter their political affiliation and should not be glorified. You can be against one extreme without supporting the other.

Not at all but is a very strong reason not to collaborate.

Can't work with someone who is radicalized, they tend to take criticism as attacks and will attack back, sometimes preemptively if they get paranoid and start seeing ghosts.

In those cases only use it if you can maintain it and fork it. Because you can't trust that someone with so extreme political views will not remove the software because they don't agree with whatever downstream group using it.

Not only one but two. The first dude has Che Guevara and the other one Fidel Castro.

I bet they'd be all riled up if someone used Mussolini or Franco as their profile picture.