subsistence234

As far as economic policy goes Democrats are neoliberals (which can be considered right wing).

They are far left on cultural topics (e.g. favoring retributive discrimination, wanting frivolous late term abortions to be legal) and far left in their attempted "solutions" to issues like homelessness (rewarding what they try to stop), crime (not enforcing the law if it would make client groups look bad, e.g. making theft under $1k a misdemeanor), education (e.g. abolishing measures of competence).

Some of that is performative, some of it is clientelism. But there are a lot of influential Democrat positions are held by sincere (cultural) leftists.

> You're literally describing the tax system that was funding it before it was axed by the guy who can't stop making mistakes.

The tax system took from those who didn't want to pay for corruption, only the actual aid.

They will continue to pay 75%, and those who wish to pay for the remaining 25% can do so voluntarily.

DOGE didn't abolish PEPFAR, they reduced its budget by 25%. Probably because ~50% of that budget was being wasted. There's likely still a big buffer before anyone runs out of meds.

Also there are lots of private donors who would make up the difference (if it's only 20% of Americans, that's more than 65 million people, who can easily come up with 25% shortfall of the $6.5B budget, that's less than $10 per person).

>you can't just reduce spending by firing swathes of people Twitter style.

mozilla probably could.

> Mozilla currently spends $260M on browser development,

Mozilla spends that on development, but firefox is only a small part of that.

It's not about that one conference.

Quite a few people would donate for Firefox development, but they can't donate to Mozilla because Mozilla spends the money on other stuff. Until now, as Google's lapdog, Mozilla didn't need donations, so that wasn't a problem (for Mozilla, it did however result in firefox getting 2.62% market share).

"Nobody" is an exaggeration since there are a few people like you. Most people want Mozilla to focus on making a good browser.

If Mozilla had used the Google billions on improving Firefox instead of fart sniffing, Firefox would be a better browser now and its market share would be above 2.62%.

The misspending was (implicitly) part of the deal: the Google money would stop if Firefox started to seriously threaten Chrome's dominance.

someone else always does and they always have the same knowledge and skills. except in this case, hellwig had more experience coding in rust than his replacement.

> Hellwig is free to change the DMA code without considering whether or not it breaks the rust bindings.

The fact that he was not allowed to do that is exactly why he escalated.

For his day job he's regularly been coding in Rust since ~2020.

Or am I missing something?

C subsystem patches have started to be rejected by Linus because they break Rust builds despite the agreement that this wouldn't happen. That's why Hellwig switched from ignoring Rust patches sent to him for review to NACKing this one.

Hellwig did it, from what anyone can tell, to get Linus to publish the actual policy which he still hasn't done yet.

How do you clean up a corrupt organization?

All the world's billionaires own about $20T. Distributing that equally among all the people of the world would provide each a $75 annuity indefinitely.

sure, making the government smaller is basically the same as putting the government in control of everything.

let's stigmatize admitting when you were wrong. never changing your mind is the only way to avoid joining a murder cult!

it's always easier to dismiss imaginary strawmen than real people.

who bullies the bullies?

"it's different when we do it..."

they didn't become angry, they became excited.

and a famous conjecture is by definition something for which all the experts know that its truth is UNKNOWN (even in cases where most experts believe it's true).

lol no

lol they probably asked him to write the article

one article criticizes them, of course they're not gonna allow that. the other article praises them, of course they're gonna allow that.

>no one called our inclusion DEI - they just called it hiring locally.

because it wasn't DEI.

you've clearly never lived anywhere else. on cultural topics the US is far left nowadays.

- limits on abortion are more strict in most of the world's developed countries.

- legally-enforced and culturally-encouraged discrimination against the local majority race is is very unusual, it mostly happens in anglo countries.

- legalizing theft under $1000 in the name of anti-racism, legalizing the intentional infecting of other people with AIDS... laws like that are considered absurd in most of the world.

that's your religion

When progressive "solutions" are implemented, if their success is measured empirically at all, they usually just make things worse. See e.g. the outcome of most educational reforms of the past 20 years, or the attempts in America's most progressive cities to solve homelessness by incentivizing and rewarding homelessness.

Not surprising, a lot of profitable rackets depend on those issues remaining unsolved. What would e.g. all the homelessness experts do, who collect billions annually to hold conferences where they agree with each other on settler-colonialism and the newest genders, if they were to actually solve homelessness?

Climate change is being solved, but it's being solved through technological innovation, not masturbatory discourse.

> consequences

The Idi Amin school of civil rights: "There is freedom of speech, but I cannot guarantee freedom after speech."

If you want to know what freedom of speech actually means in the USA, you should read up on the topic, for example starting here: https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/unprotected-speech-sy...

Even if you hate FIRE for defending the civil rights of people you hate, the article is succinct and contains links to the ca ten most relevant high level court cases.

there are five comments ITT that confuse developers of a platform with investors in a SPAC. weird mistake to make repeatedly.

the majority on this site are still relatively sane, as are the mods, but only 1% of users needs to be ideologically deranged to hide ideologically inconvenient comments with [flagged]

which is what happened, as predicted by the user.