nvegater

Targeting Russian economy cripples their ability to carry on the war but there are many ways they can get in debt to carry on with that if Putin wants. So its easy to make an argument that that is not even close to stop the war. The "Dampen popular support aspect": is debatable wether that is true or not, even if there are people against the war in Russia. The propaganda is very strong and the friction to break the status quo is very high. There is no guarantee that the sanctions can influence Russian decisions towards peacemaking.

On the other hand, its easy to come to the conclusion that people in Russia will suffer a lot. That is sad because they dont deserve it. Also the fact that they are trapped in Russia is terrible. Very few ways of getting out of there due to all the countries closing their airspace.

IMO it would have been better to open the borders for both Ukrainian and Russian refugees (prioritising Ukrainians of course) and stop making business in the future with Russia, but without stopping the current functioning of the economy. This allows people to think about their future and move out of Russia without a lot of friction. In the long term, more damages for Putin's government.

Why not ? I thought it was useful to have insights of how people are using your product and the two approaches help with that.

He didn’t said he believed that I think. They do have an independent fact checker. Wether that’s effective or makes sense is another question.

Im not sure this is a fair comparison. The Nextjs implementation seems more like "let just get it running somehow". OP's codebase is looking scalable and maintainable. Any React developer would have a very easy time getting used to the code (first-glance-readable patterns and functions, uses Typescript etc...) whereas the Nextjs implementation uses very rare patterns and file structure for a Nextjs application (IMHO).

For example, where are the styles for the skeleton ? Why inserting CSS with "dangerouslySetInnerHTML" in the index.js ? Maybe its easy and I am missing some obvious stuff but the code doesnt seem very readable to me. Maybe is due to the nature of Server Components in Nextjs ? Would be nice to hear someone else's opinion on the patterns used in this repo.

OPs code on the other hand is a piece of cake to understand. Really good job!

I went into the rabbit hole. There were 2 particularly useful links I found: https://htmx.org/essays/a-response-to-rich-harris/ https://htmx.org/examples/update-other-content/

Very interesting developing tech philosophy. I was a bit in the js bubble for a while. Its refreshing to see such a simple and powerful idea/tech outside of it:)

Thanks for responding. If I understand correctly, then I would need a server like nodejs or django generating and sending the "index.htmx" to the browser and then responding to users interactions by embedding the data from the server inside of the htmx files, correct?

Specifically this html attribute in the delete button: `hx-delete="/contact/1"`. where the id of that contact is 1 and it is hardcoded as a string.[0]

How do I dynamically generate a list of deletable items? In react would be something like (simplified obviously) `contacts.map(c => <button onClick={apiDelete(c.id)}/>`.

I dont understand how could I generate dynamic lists without hardcoding Ids... is that a case where I would need to use normal vanilla js ?

0: https://htmx.org/examples/delete-row/

I think 'you' (consciousness) are a combination of all of those things you mention (body, thoughts, memories, feelings etc..). I dont think you can do a distillation of the 'you', without removing consciousness. If you perform this distillation the only thing left is a dead body. (maybe thats what you mean when you say that all living beings could well be the same if 'you' is removed).

But I'm not very trained in this topic, so I'm not sure what I am saying its coherent, but I like and agree with Antonio Damasio's perspective and I find it refreshing. That is where my comment is coming from.

I really like JS/TS Combo. My only critic is the Enums - particularly the String enums. It is really an absolute mess.

Any time horizon ? 1 year ? 6 months ?

It requires users to pay gas fees when making deposits, as well as for the services that "obfuscate" the withdrawals. Thats the payment. You trust that the nodes will obfuscate the transactions to receive the fees. The rest is basic smart contracts execution.

The compliance topic is tricky and deceptive. Only the user with a "Note" is able to link deposit and withdrawal. With this note the user can generate a proof of origin. This makes tornado cash compliant enough.

E.G. If the withdrawal address is under Money laundry suspicion, it may be urged to provide the origin of the transaction. That is possible [1] but there is no way of a 3rd party to Tag an account as "suspicious" based on the Tornado chain information (due to the obfuscation done by the Nodes that are getting the fees).

As far as I understand there is no accountability. The regulators would have to persecute all the nodes for helping out with the laundry. But there is no way for the nodes to know they're participating in laundry. So they cant be persecuted. Regulations needs to be invented for this kind of schema.

Please someone correct me if I said anything wrong. Im not an expert is just my conclusion based on some reading.

[1]: https://tornadocash.eth.link/compliance/

Better explanation of when Tinybase makes sense than the one in the website.

I've been using react with typescript since 2019 and I haven't encounter any problems using Objects to manage data. Recoiljs is type safe and very efficient.

The website does a great job explaining how to use the api, but it would be nice to see some functional examples as well. Its difficult to imagine for me, in which use cases Tinybase is shining.

I see it a bit different. Using your own sentence structure:

"The line of argument supports the prevention of the existence of an undefined number of living beings to max. the quality of life of other existing living beings."

The argument doesn't seem to me as simple as you are portraying it and I don't see where you got the extermination part from.