piekvorst

It’s also runnable (scripts), clickable (urls), and context-dependent, which makes it a nice UI.

For Hegel, state is something vastly different than for modern democracies. Sure, democracies can be pervasive as well but, to my knowledge, nowhere near Hegel’s level, not today.

Jesus Christ wasn’t a politician so we don’t know. But we do know that religious politicians, past and modern, rarely respect freedom.

> you showing evidence related to governments and states

Not just states but statism, a system in which man’s life and work belong to the state, and the state may claim it by compelling him to sacrifice it. This provides the theoretical hardware for dictatorial control.

> I don't understand how you could make this claim.

After studying Plato, Hegel, Marx, Rousseau, fascist ideologies, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. This list is by no means exhaustive, just a few majors from the top of my head.

Sure, they didn’t just say “shoot people for power.” That’s a very shallow modern view. Instead, they champion extreme forms of altruism and its only logical expression: statism, which holds that man’s life and work belong to the state, to society, to the group, the race, the nation, the economic class.

> How does this statement by Hegel champion dictatorships?

The statement alone surely doesn’t. His philosophy does. For him, state is a sacred authority that transcends individual will.

“A country that violates the rights of its own citizens, will not respect the rights of its neighbors.”

That’s from my readings of philosophy.

But yeah, I do recognize the same sentiment as you found. I think philosophy itself is an answer: most philosophies explicitly champion dictatorships, under whitewashed terms. Ever heard something like “society is a big organ transcending individual needs”? We got it from Hegel.

I stopped listening to Vim users one day. I can’t prove it but I feel like they don’t really understand efficiency, just following the traditions.

Is it built automatically from a scheme, each block manually, or something in between?

“Strong” social safety can be achieved only by enslaving producers who have to provide the ground for “many many” caring people. This is always the case. Consider Russian support of young families: the government takes the money from families without children and gives it to those who have. Personally, I cannot imagine a worse moral depravity than supporting this atrocity as a matter of justice.

Capitalism is not “slavery with extra steps,” it’s freedom in a fragile world repleted with conflicting goals. Just because people don’t agree with your goals doesn’t make you a slave.

Acme [1], a text editor for programmers. It’s a very unusual tool and I have collected hundreds of notes (as well as dozens of bugs and inconsistencies) from the past two years of using it. Now I feel fully assimilated, I do not take as much notes and it feels the right time to start organizing the knowledge, to put ideas together.

I think that Acme is very underrated in its domain (a tool for experts). The coverage is minuscule. That’s why I am thinking about blog posts, maybe video tutorials. I do not know what should it be exactly.

I do not have any time estimates. I have a very demanding main job (I work as a software developer) and young family that I need to take care of. This project demands focused efforts and selectivity that I can barely satisfy. But I wouldn’t give up, the thing is totally worth it. If it’s going to take years, so be it.

If you have any comments, send me a letter at kalterdev@gmail.com. Have a good day.

1: https://9p.io/sys/doc/acme/acme.html

Python is good for general-purpose scripting, which does cover most of the tasks, but it’s still too bureaucratic when it comes to OS primitives. And when a small script at hand is tightly related to some OS thing anyway, it’s not a disservice to write it in shell.

It does seem like a accurate summary

In practice, the only noticeable difference I have witnessed is

    for (f in *.c) if (test -f $f) cc $f

I can write the whole thing in a single line (which is essential in GUI and interactive contexts) and it reads well.

Bash is an advanced beast. In Bourne, it was

    for i in `seq 10`
    do
        print $i
    done

Which is pretty much readable though. The only issue is Pascal vs C syntax. As a fan of the former, I admit that the latter is more advanced: it stacks better. E.g. consider

    if (test -f junk) rm junk

against

    if test -f junk; then rm junk; fi

The former “avoids semicolons that Bourne requires in odd places, and the syntax characters better set off the active parts of the command.” [1]

1: Rc—The Plan 9 Shell https://9p.io/sys/doc/rc.html

I’m sure a moron for living in a dictatorship, seeing what kind of compromises perpetuate it (such as the right to self-determination) and trying to break them.

If “making free” means building outside a system of freedom, that’s too expensive. The U.S. tried to build a “democracy” in Iraq but failed.

If “making free” means just leaving people alone do what whatever they want, it’s not necessary. (They’d end up with another warlord anyways.) If the citizens of a free country want resources, why not provide them with a legitimate way to get it? The U.S. could, instead of making hypocrite puppet regimes, fully integrate (with military if needed) the resources they need into her system.

If resources don’t have a legitimate owner, they’re effectively unowned. This is the case of all dictatorships. Any free country can take those resources and integrate them into their system, provided they recognize and enforce property rights. Otherwise it’s anarchism, a dysfunctional hybrid of old dictatorship and American pragmatic profit, not a secure system of property rights.

(Assigning ownership to nation as such wouldn’t fix the problem. A nation without property rights cannot own anything.)

Doesn’t IPv6 have random, anonymous addresses (RFC 4941)? Further, user fingerprinting flourishes without IP addresses.

IPv6 existence is questioned not because people fail to configure it. It’s because they do not understand the problems it solves. Those problems are so large they’re invisible at the individual human scale. You either know them (which is not a secret) or invent superficial charges against the design.

Happy new year from my heart

I feel sad for CLI tools shift from pure text to pseudo-graphics. A lot of text advantages is lost, few GUI strengths are met.

LLM enable me to extend the limited number of my individual thoughts. Sometimes they help me connect the dots faster. The only condition is: I do the main job. The final choice is always mine. I never let LLM be a blackbox independent agent.

I doubt that Russian ISP would cooperate.

> This honestly disgusts me. GPL violations are already bad on their own, but on a medical device? That me, and thousands of people rely on to stay alive?

Disgusting is not respecting the producers who put together the device that wouldn’t exist otherwise, leaving thousands of people in pain or death.

It’s never early to prepare for JavaScript complete takeover.

American constitution is underappreciated. It ensures peace but faces profoundly undeserved hatred in return.

Nice licensing

They won’t appear magically, they’d do it because the problem of production is never solved. What I’m trying to say is that AI takeover, if it happens, shouldn’t be feared. It’s appropriate to plan for the transition, not apocalypse.

Thanks for The Princess Bride and Sleepless in Seattle. Rest in peace.

The crucial observation is the fact that automation has historically been a net creator of jobs, not destroyer.

The primary Stallman’s output is neither technical nor legal but moral. He condemns any entity that doesn’t grant its users four “freedoms.” And the primary disease that GPL spreads is not arbitrary legal restrictions but the moral code (altruism) that sanctions it. The fact that it’s not meant to be forced upon developers is irrelevant: it preserves the philosophy that could be weaponized in the future, possibly in an altered form.

But yeah, altruism is typically shared by both anarchists and communists. The only remaining question seems to be: who better embodies the ideal?