How do you define what a Nazi is?

This is an odd question in the context of the USSR and WWII. It’s not like we’re debating about Milo Yiannopoulos on Twitter and whether it’s correct to call him a Nazi because technically he wasn’t a member of the party from the early 20th century. “Nazis” here refers to members of the Wehrmacht and the Nazi party. It may also include, as a shorthand, people who were not formally party of the Nazi party but provided material aid to the Nazis. That’s treason in any country, especially during wartime.

Do counter revolutionaries deserve to be sent to worker camps where the conditions are so bad many die?

No. To the extent that imprisoning people is necessary, they deserve humane conditions. The goal should be rehabilitation, but that’s not possible in all circumstances. It’s my understanding that the harsh conditions of Soviet prisons were largely due to wartime scarcity and improved as time went on.

“Send people who don’t agree with my world view to worker camps” Doesn’t feel like a good thing

“disagreeing with my world view” is a weird way to say “stealing vast swaths of wealth” or “enslaving people” or “invading a sovereign nation” or “committing mass murder of Jews, Romani, queer people, and socialists”. I’m not going to pretend that 100% of Soviet prisoners deserved to be there or that everyone who died deserved to die. For example, the USSR was very progressive on queer issues at its inception, but Stalin later criminalized homosexuality. That was clearly wrong. But to act like the entire system was a systemic way to imprison people for thought crimes is disingenuous. Probably not your intention, but rather because that’s the framing of decades of propaganda surrounding Soviet prisons.

This does literally nothing to refute the interpretation. I could care less that the director heard the Rand comparison and thought that meant people thought he was a Republican or whatever.

Yeah but The Incredibles is basically Randian propaganda about how the unexceptional are intimidated by exceptional people and force them to perform inadequacy for the comfort of others and how this is a net loss for society.

Technology is great to discuss because it’s just logic and facts and objective arguments. But bring in politics and it becomes a mess and that’s the problem with this divide in the privacy community.

Good post in general, but I disagree with this in particular. All technology is political. Not in a Democrat/Republican way but in a “how do we distribute resources within society?” way. Not to mention a big selling point for privacy tools is that they can be used by political dissidents. I think a problem does arise when a community manages to fool itself into believing it’s apolitical when what it’s really done is develop an orthodoxy to shut down political discussion.

Neither of those things are going to break the country. It’s a matter of priorities. Dems sell themselves as the adults in the room who are going to fight against fascism. And this is what Biden is doing instead.

This is so sad

I think this is more of a truism within standup comedy that’s leaked out into being general advice. It can be offputting for a standup comedian to laugh at all their own jokes but even then there’s exceptions to the rule.

American

savings or investments

I don’t understand

Combo Class is a neat math education channel where things are often on fire or falling apart in the background in a way that’s fascinating on top of the math itself

Side note, I have no idea how many subscribers counts as obscure. It seems relative to the size of the niche. Or maybe I have no idea how big people are relative to how much I care about them. Like I would expect Ben Levin (music theory and production creator) to be closer in subs to Adam Neely (same) but he’s an entire order of magnitude lower. Like is CJ The X (video essayist) obscure enough at 341K subs?

“Oh, they print in that order? That’s weird.”

I did both of these at once last week.

Added a breakpoint. Debugger didn’t break.

Added an echo "here";. Debugger didn’t print.

Added a throw new Exception('fuck');. Debugger didn’t throw.

Stepped through. Debugger wouldn’t let me step in.

It took me almost an hour to realize it wasn’t the debugger’s fault and that a variable I thought was guaranteed to be truthy at that point was actually falsey due to upstream changes in a spreadsheet parser. I felt kind of stupid for not trusting the debugger at that point.

For context: these are the original lines

Wasn’t this election significantly less close than 2020?

Thank god

In the way that’s common in languages like Java where you’re making a property read-only, yes. But there’s a whole protocol in Python called descriptors where you can override the . on a field. The most common form of these is class methods annotated with the @property annotation, which makes it so the method can be accessed as if it were a property.

Yeah. I can understand the use case when it’s something relating to keeping simple state in sync by replacing it with derived state. But this particular case was flushing a cache after each get, which made each get of the property non-deterministic based on the class’s state.

I helped a friend debug a script last week that was working inconsistently in really weird ways. I looked at the script and it was all event hooks littered with sleep calls. I told him he was basically fuzz testing his own script and then getting surprised when he found race conditions. Shit was wild. Also, sometimes getters in Python are a mistake.

Is it bad if my first reaction to this is “I can fix her”? Like I feel like if I could just use it as a component system and pass simple types as props it would work nicely. But I suppose That defeats the purpose anyway. It sounds like a pain to use for anything beyond basic contexts.

I use PHP daily. The only thing that seems overly magical on a cursory glance is Livewire, but I’ll probably end up using Solid for the frontend anyway.

colden the relations with Israel