The article you're linking to says it most certainly did happen. It's not debunking tulipmania, it's debunking the apparently commonly held belief (I've never heard this expressed anywhere, so I'm puzzled as to how it's commonly held) that most of the Dutch population were involved and that it caused a massive economic crash in the non-tulip economy.
15 years ago the vast majority of desktops ran Microsoft's operating systems. Microsoft Office was dominant and virtually everyone felt obliged to exchange editable documents in its formats.
Today that hasn't actually changed. Microsoft was unable to move its monopoly to the new portable computing markets, but desktops remain the dominant computing platform, and Microsoft continues to dominate it.
What is arguable is that the interventions multiple governments took part in may have at least made sure Microsoft was unable to control the portable computing market: the EU in particular took action to ensure Microsoft didn't have a browser monopoly, and the actions of the Clinton administration were enough to ensure that Microsoft stopped doing serious development of IE after IE4 for a few years. When Microsoft resumed development, releasing 5.0, 5.5, and then 6, the EU got involved and again Microsoft felt obliged to pause development.
Without Microsoft's control over the web, both Apple and Google were able to produce devices that Windows would never have been suitable for, that were useful and fit into the existing ecosystem.
So, yeah... Microsoft still owns the desktop. But it doesn't really own anything else. It doesn't own markets that literally would not exist if Microsoft had been able to control the web as it hoped to. A mixed result, but overall, a positive one.
Not just no incentive to spend it (beyond the absolutely necessary right now) but no incentive to lend (invest) it either unless the returns are so astronomical they outweigh the loss in value of any collateral that the borrower might put up.
Bitcoin enthusiasts are overjoyed about this, because they're suddenly rich, so overjoyed they're missing the part that this entire thing is a disaster for Bitcoin in terms of its supposed use. And if Bitcoin is completely unusable for the purpose for which it was designed then... what's the point of Bitcoin? The world's biggest disorganized pyramid scheme?
Can this last anyway? Will it reach a peak and then start slowly dropping, or will it collapse? If it collapses (again!) then even if it reaches a more reasonable level, will retailers (who presumably will lose quite a bit of money on it) ever accept it again?
Hyperdeflation, to be followed at some point by hyperinflation. This is not what a stable currency looks like. BTC enthusiasts should be thinking "Well, failure never felt so good", not "Woohoo, this is good news for Bitcoin". Because it really, really, isn't.
In fairness, Bob was never forced upon users who wanted a recent version of a Microsoft product. Clippy, the Ribbon, and the Windows 8 Tablet-for-Desktop UI are another matter however...
(and I'm not making a pro/anti argument, since obviously cash gets dropped/lost/burned all the time)
True, but if significant numbers of people accidentally lose a whole lot of $50 bills, the government/central bank/whatever can ramp up printing more and ensure that equal amounts of money is still in the economy (just not in the pockets of those who lost it.)
When it's lost in Bitcoin land however, it's lost. Forever. The amount of money in circulation shrinks. The algorithms are not designed to find ways around the lack of money in circulation.
This is why it's a problematic currency. Right now it's suffering a massive bout of deflation (which, ironically, BTC boosters are celebrating because, well, it means they can cash out and turn their stored BTC into not-BTC, despite not seeing the problem with this.) It will probably continue to do so, which is why it'll never catch on as a replacement for cash - or at least, if it does, we're truly screwed because permanent deflation is pretty much a permanent recession for any economy that's based on it, as it effectively punishes consumer spending and makes borrowing impossible.
I thought it was a fair question. I have no idea what 15 extensions the OP was talking about - I don't think it's even possible to use Firefox 56 with 10 extensions, let alone 15, as virtually every extension causes Firefox to slow down and leak memory.
The OP's responder is right to ask, because (a) if you want to know about relative performance, you can't find out until you test it, and the OP should know that, and (b) the very assertion is seriously questionable and the OP needs to be called on over it.
An AC found it offensive. Boo hoo. If you're going to make an absurd assertion about what Firefox needs to be usable, and you're vague about it, be prepared to questions asking you to back up your assertion.
No computer language is going to help a project programmed by idiots.
That's just not true. Programming languages can enforce constraints that make common errors either difficult or impossible.
I have to admit a disenchantment with software development in general these days, largely because the consensus within the community is that fast and cheap is better than reliable and secure. We pick programming languages like PHP and C++ where we know we're going to make errors we're never going to be able to debug, and often will be completely unaware of until they strike, because meh who cares I can write in {insecure language} and I like it so sucks to be users right? Besides I'm a genius and would never make those mistakes (yes you will, asshole.)
I refuse to read another ESR article on principle, he's a jack-ass, and I seriously doubt Go is going to be taking over from C any time soon, but I generally agree with the sentiment that we made a mistake going away from Java, back to languages that are optimized towards making errors. Java is too bureaucratic, and C# is nearly as bad, and while it's overstated I do generally agree that there needs to be more control over GC for the average programmer, but there has to be a happy medium here - better than Java doesn't have to mean insane type checkers and/or going back to directly manipulating pointers.
And yeah, I know C++ has smartpointers. But it also has regular old shit pointers. And sure, you would only use the latter in the right circumstances, but, let's be honest, all those other programmers you work with, who you are soooooo much smarter than, wouldn't...
If you're a developer, that was considerably more readable than the COBOL-like version you translated it to.
I could read it immediately: set B to not B if A isn't 1, else 0.
Developers who become used to a particular language generally can read it as long as it's formatted correctly, which religionofpeas did. Even stuff like while(*d++=*s++); becomes second nature. The key isn't in avoiding symbols, which you're supposed to be able to just read if you plan to do any coding at all, but to ensure formatting and sane use of whitespace makes turns a string of symbols into a set of instructions.
While this is true, both websites are sites I visit on a regular basis, and I've never had Firefox (or Chrome) blow up simply because it loaded either in a tab. So while I suspect one or both had something going on, there has to be a reason why it became a particular problem with 57.
No, he didn't. Is Musk a programmer anyway? I find it hard to believe he's doing the programming at SpaceX.
I rather like the theory that Wright was, actually, really, Nakamoto, because I'd expect Nakamoto to be that dodgy. It's just a shame that if he was, he chickened out at the last minute.
You keep calling them trespassers, but they whistled nonchalantly when they passed by the security guards, while carrying FedEx boxes.
You keep calling them muggers, but they used their finger to make it feel like a gun, when they told their victims to give them their money.
You keep calling them murderers, but they gave people falsely labeled drugs hoping they'd take them and die.
Hackers, using the popular definition of people who gain unauthorized access to computer systems, are not always cracking passwords or exploiting buffer overflows. Social engineering is a common tactic, even Kevin Mitnick used it.
FWIW, I've been cutting down the number of extensions over the last few years because Firefox became virtually unusable very quickly with most of them. For me, it was AdBlock Plus/uBlock Origin (depending on what seemed to work better), YesScript, Open In Chrome, and very little else. Once Inspect Element became a feature I removed Firebug, and was glad they added it.
My suspicion is that once the bugs are worked out, extensions will become possible again in a way that they no longer were for Firefox 56 and earlier. I'm surprised to hear of people with 10-15 browser extensions, I have difficultly believing Firefox was usable with that many unless the extensions selected were really, really, simple. Given people have been including NoScript etc in their list of Broken Extensions I Must Have Back, I find that hard to believe.
Anyway, the point is hang in there. Firefox Quantum does have bugs. A process handling just two tabs, Linked In and TMS, bloated itself up to 6Gb overnight the other day on one of my computers, so I'm not going to claim it's ready, but when the fixes are in, it should be more extension friendly than its predecessor. Remember, the advice for everyone reporting performance and memory issues with the latter was always "Have you tried disabling any extensions?"
Give them a chance. This is the first good news I've heard in a while for the only browser left with a half decent UI.
It also won't save anyone from abuses that are anti-network neutrality.
The most likely scenarios are not full blocks, but "We give you 256kbps access to the Internet, but if X pays Y, we'll make Z's sites available to you at 1Gbps.
That could look like "Pay $10 an extra month and get smooth Youtube video!" or "Hey, Google, if you pay us $1M a year, we'll let our customers access Youtube unthrottled."
This "workaround" will do fuck all to prevent that from happening. Your VPN connection will continue to be throttled unless the VPN company pays and is somehow able to identify all the IPs that make up their P2P network, in which case they'll go bust pretty quickly.
If you think Fancy Bear is dead, you apparently are aware of something US intelligence agencies aren't..And if you think they're whistle blowers, you're an idiot.
What I suspect, however, is that you're subscribing to the ludicrous and debunked conspiracy theory pushed, and then withdrawn, by Fox News, blaming a Clinton staffer, despite the fact there's absolutely no evidence whatsoever pointing at him.
As long as anyone who isn't allowed to vote is given immunity from taxes and doesn't have to obey any laws, I think your suggestion is fine.
(I don't think your suggestion is fine. I don't think you either understand the point of a democracy,. nor understand the concept of representative rule. Which, ironically perhaps, means you'd probably be barred from voting should your own test become law and fairly and logically administered.)
Yeah, it's about speed. I'm tired of having to restart my browser because it slows to a crawl even having closed all my non-pinned tabs periodically.
Of course, it could be argued it's also about memory.
Privacy? You act as if that's a new issue that wasn't a concern in 2001. It's ALWAYS been a concern. Ever since Netscape introduced Javascript it's been a concern. Why are you treating privacy as new, and performance as old and solved? The latter has been a serious issue since Firefox 4, it WASN'T a problem in 2001.
Calling it flamebait means you think it's something that's done with malicious intent. Here you go again, trying to insert feelings into an argument.
I don't think I agree with AmiMojo about Damore's motives, but nonetheless you might want to read that, and step away from the keyboard for a moment: you claim some (from what I can see) are pretty objective statements about Damore are "malicious" - presumably because they don't paint him in a good light, and then claim AmiMojo is the one "inserting feelings into an argument."
I do agree with AmiMojo about the moderation: an apparently easily offended moderator, and many responding them, have decided that because the facts make Damore look bad, that it must be a sign of malice to be even mentioning them.
The problem here is that it isn't. Damore's words had (and have) real life consequences. Despite the claim he was totally non-sexist when writing it, that isn't actually true when analyzing the arguments he used. Damore worded his essay in a way designed to make it look pro-diversity while cherry picking and exaggerating facts to cause an opposite impact.
Some have suggested Damore's honesty and intentions should be questioned because of that. That's a reasonable thing to do.
But... I'm not sure they're right. I think it's more a cause of an expert in one field (computing) thinking that makes him an expert in others and failing spectacularly trying to prove the real experts wrong.
I say that because I'm a nerd too, and while I was never stupid enough to start claiming minor biological differences explain women's poor advancement in careers they should have no problem with, I certainly have been stupid in the past latching onto "contrarian arguments" about everything from the Civil War to economics.
You see this on Slashdot all the time. How many people here disagree with the 97% or so of climate scientists on Climate Change, for example? It certainly is more than 3%. Are these people experts in climate change? Do they have all the figures available to them? Do they have insights that Michael Mann et al don't?
No? No, what they are are really good developers. Their friends consider them geniuses, because they can do things with computers that other people can only dream of. And they keep getting told that all the time, that they're geniuses.
And so, when they wade into another field of study, one they know little about, it's a trainwreck.
Damore didn't lose his job and become unpopular because he's autistic. And he probably didn't because he's the next Harvey Weinstein or Roger Ailes. No, I suspect he lost them because he's a typical computer nerd going through a contrarian phase.
That should be a learning experience for most, but nobody here wants to hear it, because the experts being wrong is a sexier story.
Congress tried to force bank's to make loans to people who couldn't afford them via regulation.
Congress has never done that. That was a lie perpetuated by certain right wing elements after the 2008 crash, by pretending that making it illegal to discriminate by skin color is the same thing as making it illegal to discriminate by income.
It's also inherently an argument that's racist for that reason: it implies that blacks can't pay back loans, regardless of income. That kind of blatant race baiting is why we have Trump's Republican party, and I know quite a few Republicans who admit promoting this kind of BS was an error.
Clearly the regulations did not lead to any diversity of opinion whatsoever
I would expect, if the facts are obvious, newspapers to tend to report the same thing. In politics that's not frequent because frequently the facts aren't obvious, but it was fairly clear well before Trump was elected that he would be awful.
Remember even many conservative publications were against Trump. This wasn't a conservative vs liberal thing, it was readily apparent.
I don't want "diversity of opinion" when it comes to actual facts - all media should strive to tell the truth, and you will expect, when they do, for them to tell similar stories and form similar opinions.
What accounts, supposedly associated with Antifa, are *verified* and can you link to tweets from those *verified* accounts that promote hate (other than hate of Nazis, which, you know, fuck those guys) or violence?
Slashdot Mirror
The article you're linking to says it most certainly did happen. It's not debunking tulipmania, it's debunking the apparently commonly held belief (I've never heard this expressed anywhere, so I'm puzzled as to how it's commonly held) that most of the Dutch population were involved and that it caused a massive economic crash in the non-tulip economy.
15 years ago the vast majority of desktops ran Microsoft's operating systems. Microsoft Office was dominant and virtually everyone felt obliged to exchange editable documents in its formats.
Today that hasn't actually changed. Microsoft was unable to move its monopoly to the new portable computing markets, but desktops remain the dominant computing platform, and Microsoft continues to dominate it.
What is arguable is that the interventions multiple governments took part in may have at least made sure Microsoft was unable to control the portable computing market: the EU in particular took action to ensure Microsoft didn't have a browser monopoly, and the actions of the Clinton administration were enough to ensure that Microsoft stopped doing serious development of IE after IE4 for a few years. When Microsoft resumed development, releasing 5.0, 5.5, and then 6, the EU got involved and again Microsoft felt obliged to pause development.
Without Microsoft's control over the web, both Apple and Google were able to produce devices that Windows would never have been suitable for, that were useful and fit into the existing ecosystem.
So, yeah... Microsoft still owns the desktop. But it doesn't really own anything else. It doesn't own markets that literally would not exist if Microsoft had been able to control the web as it hoped to. A mixed result, but overall, a positive one.
Not just no incentive to spend it (beyond the absolutely necessary right now) but no incentive to lend (invest) it either unless the returns are so astronomical they outweigh the loss in value of any collateral that the borrower might put up.
Bitcoin enthusiasts are overjoyed about this, because they're suddenly rich, so overjoyed they're missing the part that this entire thing is a disaster for Bitcoin in terms of its supposed use. And if Bitcoin is completely unusable for the purpose for which it was designed then... what's the point of Bitcoin? The world's biggest disorganized pyramid scheme?
Can this last anyway? Will it reach a peak and then start slowly dropping, or will it collapse? If it collapses (again!) then even if it reaches a more reasonable level, will retailers (who presumably will lose quite a bit of money on it) ever accept it again?
Hyperdeflation, to be followed at some point by hyperinflation. This is not what a stable currency looks like. BTC enthusiasts should be thinking "Well, failure never felt so good", not "Woohoo, this is good news for Bitcoin". Because it really, really, isn't.
In fairness, Bob was never forced upon users who wanted a recent version of a Microsoft product. Clippy, the Ribbon, and the Windows 8 Tablet-for-Desktop UI are another matter however...
True, but if significant numbers of people accidentally lose a whole lot of $50 bills, the government/central bank/whatever can ramp up printing more and ensure that equal amounts of money is still in the economy (just not in the pockets of those who lost it.)
When it's lost in Bitcoin land however, it's lost. Forever. The amount of money in circulation shrinks. The algorithms are not designed to find ways around the lack of money in circulation.
This is why it's a problematic currency. Right now it's suffering a massive bout of deflation (which, ironically, BTC boosters are celebrating because, well, it means they can cash out and turn their stored BTC into not-BTC, despite not seeing the problem with this.) It will probably continue to do so, which is why it'll never catch on as a replacement for cash - or at least, if it does, we're truly screwed because permanent deflation is pretty much a permanent recession for any economy that's based on it, as it effectively punishes consumer spending and makes borrowing impossible.
...who brought you the Ribbon. And Windows 8's "Tablet interface for desktops".
"RAII is as effective a method of garbage collection is the rhythm method is an effective a method of birth control." Discuss.
I thought it was a fair question. I have no idea what 15 extensions the OP was talking about - I don't think it's even possible to use Firefox 56 with 10 extensions, let alone 15, as virtually every extension causes Firefox to slow down and leak memory.
The OP's responder is right to ask, because (a) if you want to know about relative performance, you can't find out until you test it, and the OP should know that, and (b) the very assertion is seriously questionable and the OP needs to be called on over it.
An AC found it offensive. Boo hoo. If you're going to make an absurd assertion about what Firefox needs to be usable, and you're vague about it, be prepared to questions asking you to back up your assertion.
Good luck with that.
That's just not true. Programming languages can enforce constraints that make common errors either difficult or impossible.
I have to admit a disenchantment with software development in general these days, largely because the consensus within the community is that fast and cheap is better than reliable and secure. We pick programming languages like PHP and C++ where we know we're going to make errors we're never going to be able to debug, and often will be completely unaware of until they strike, because meh who cares I can write in {insecure language} and I like it so sucks to be users right? Besides I'm a genius and would never make those mistakes (yes you will, asshole.)
I refuse to read another ESR article on principle, he's a jack-ass, and I seriously doubt Go is going to be taking over from C any time soon, but I generally agree with the sentiment that we made a mistake going away from Java, back to languages that are optimized towards making errors. Java is too bureaucratic, and C# is nearly as bad, and while it's overstated I do generally agree that there needs to be more control over GC for the average programmer, but there has to be a happy medium here - better than Java doesn't have to mean insane type checkers and/or going back to directly manipulating pointers.
And yeah, I know C++ has smartpointers. But it also has regular old shit pointers. And sure, you would only use the latter in the right circumstances, but, let's be honest, all those other programmers you work with, who you are soooooo much smarter than, wouldn't...
If you're a developer, that was considerably more readable than the COBOL-like version you translated it to.
I could read it immediately: set B to not B if A isn't 1, else 0.
Developers who become used to a particular language generally can read it as long as it's formatted correctly, which religionofpeas did. Even stuff like while(*d++=*s++); becomes second nature. The key isn't in avoiding symbols, which you're supposed to be able to just read if you plan to do any coding at all, but to ensure formatting and sane use of whitespace makes turns a string of symbols into a set of instructions.
While this is true, both websites are sites I visit on a regular basis, and I've never had Firefox (or Chrome) blow up simply because it loaded either in a tab. So while I suspect one or both had something going on, there has to be a reason why it became a particular problem with 57.
No, he didn't. Is Musk a programmer anyway? I find it hard to believe he's doing the programming at SpaceX.
I rather like the theory that Wright was, actually, really, Nakamoto, because I'd expect Nakamoto to be that dodgy. It's just a shame that if he was, he chickened out at the last minute.
You keep calling them trespassers, but they whistled nonchalantly when they passed by the security guards, while carrying FedEx boxes.
You keep calling them muggers, but they used their finger to make it feel like a gun, when they told their victims to give them their money.
You keep calling them murderers, but they gave people falsely labeled drugs hoping they'd take them and die.
Hackers, using the popular definition of people who gain unauthorized access to computer systems, are not always cracking passwords or exploiting buffer overflows. Social engineering is a common tactic, even Kevin Mitnick used it.
Is Mitnick not a hacker?
FWIW, I've been cutting down the number of extensions over the last few years because Firefox became virtually unusable very quickly with most of them. For me, it was AdBlock Plus/uBlock Origin (depending on what seemed to work better), YesScript, Open In Chrome, and very little else. Once Inspect Element became a feature I removed Firebug, and was glad they added it.
My suspicion is that once the bugs are worked out, extensions will become possible again in a way that they no longer were for Firefox 56 and earlier. I'm surprised to hear of people with 10-15 browser extensions, I have difficultly believing Firefox was usable with that many unless the extensions selected were really, really, simple. Given people have been including NoScript etc in their list of Broken Extensions I Must Have Back, I find that hard to believe.
Anyway, the point is hang in there. Firefox Quantum does have bugs. A process handling just two tabs, Linked In and TMS, bloated itself up to 6Gb overnight the other day on one of my computers, so I'm not going to claim it's ready, but when the fixes are in, it should be more extension friendly than its predecessor. Remember, the advice for everyone reporting performance and memory issues with the latter was always "Have you tried disabling any extensions?"
Give them a chance. This is the first good news I've heard in a while for the only browser left with a half decent UI.
It also won't save anyone from abuses that are anti-network neutrality.
The most likely scenarios are not full blocks, but "We give you 256kbps access to the Internet, but if X pays Y, we'll make Z's sites available to you at 1Gbps.
That could look like "Pay $10 an extra month and get smooth Youtube video!" or "Hey, Google, if you pay us $1M a year, we'll let our customers access Youtube unthrottled."
This "workaround" will do fuck all to prevent that from happening. Your VPN connection will continue to be throttled unless the VPN company pays and is somehow able to identify all the IPs that make up their P2P network, in which case they'll go bust pretty quickly.
I don't see how this is a solution.
If you think Fancy Bear is dead, you apparently are aware of something US intelligence agencies aren't. .And if you think they're whistle blowers, you're an idiot.
What I suspect, however, is that you're subscribing to the ludicrous and debunked conspiracy theory pushed, and then withdrawn, by Fox News, blaming a Clinton staffer, despite the fact there's absolutely no evidence whatsoever pointing at him.
Yeah, kinda. The phone company can't deny him phone service. They don't have to offer Internet service.
As long as anyone who isn't allowed to vote is given immunity from taxes and doesn't have to obey any laws, I think your suggestion is fine.
(I don't think your suggestion is fine. I don't think you either understand the point of a democracy,. nor understand the concept of representative rule. Which, ironically perhaps, means you'd probably be barred from voting should your own test become law and fairly and logically administered.)
Yeah, it's about speed. I'm tired of having to restart my browser because it slows to a crawl even having closed all my non-pinned tabs periodically.
Of course, it could be argued it's also about memory.
Privacy? You act as if that's a new issue that wasn't a concern in 2001. It's ALWAYS been a concern. Ever since Netscape introduced Javascript it's been a concern. Why are you treating privacy as new, and performance as old and solved? The latter has been a serious issue since Firefox 4, it WASN'T a problem in 2001.
I don't think I agree with AmiMojo about Damore's motives, but nonetheless you might want to read that, and step away from the keyboard for a moment: you claim some (from what I can see) are pretty objective statements about Damore are "malicious" - presumably because they don't paint him in a good light, and then claim AmiMojo is the one "inserting feelings into an argument."
I do agree with AmiMojo about the moderation: an apparently easily offended moderator, and many responding them, have decided that because the facts make Damore look bad, that it must be a sign of malice to be even mentioning them.
The problem here is that it isn't. Damore's words had (and have) real life consequences. Despite the claim he was totally non-sexist when writing it, that isn't actually true when analyzing the arguments he used. Damore worded his essay in a way designed to make it look pro-diversity while cherry picking and exaggerating facts to cause an opposite impact.
Some have suggested Damore's honesty and intentions should be questioned because of that. That's a reasonable thing to do.
But... I'm not sure they're right. I think it's more a cause of an expert in one field (computing) thinking that makes him an expert in others and failing spectacularly trying to prove the real experts wrong.
I say that because I'm a nerd too, and while I was never stupid enough to start claiming minor biological differences explain women's poor advancement in careers they should have no problem with, I certainly have been stupid in the past latching onto "contrarian arguments" about everything from the Civil War to economics.
You see this on Slashdot all the time. How many people here disagree with the 97% or so of climate scientists on Climate Change, for example? It certainly is more than 3%. Are these people experts in climate change? Do they have all the figures available to them? Do they have insights that Michael Mann et al don't?
No? No, what they are are really good developers. Their friends consider them geniuses, because they can do things with computers that other people can only dream of. And they keep getting told that all the time, that they're geniuses.
And so, when they wade into another field of study, one they know little about, it's a trainwreck.
Damore didn't lose his job and become unpopular because he's autistic. And he probably didn't because he's the next Harvey Weinstein or Roger Ailes. No, I suspect he lost them because he's a typical computer nerd going through a contrarian phase.
That should be a learning experience for most, but nobody here wants to hear it, because the experts being wrong is a sexier story.
Congress has never done that. That was a lie perpetuated by certain right wing elements after the 2008 crash, by pretending that making it illegal to discriminate by skin color is the same thing as making it illegal to discriminate by income.
It's also inherently an argument that's racist for that reason: it implies that blacks can't pay back loans, regardless of income. That kind of blatant race baiting is why we have Trump's Republican party, and I know quite a few Republicans who admit promoting this kind of BS was an error.
I would expect, if the facts are obvious, newspapers to tend to report the same thing. In politics that's not frequent because frequently the facts aren't obvious, but it was fairly clear well before Trump was elected that he would be awful.
Remember even many conservative publications were against Trump. This wasn't a conservative vs liberal thing, it was readily apparent.
I don't want "diversity of opinion" when it comes to actual facts - all media should strive to tell the truth, and you will expect, when they do, for them to tell similar stories and form similar opinions.
It's not. If I understand the GP correctly, he's saying SIX telecommunication operators is terrible, but ONE would be awesome.
(Not only is it terrible whataboutism but I don't have much of a problem with six anyway...)
What accounts, supposedly associated with Antifa, are *verified* and can you link to tweets from those *verified* accounts that promote hate (other than hate of Nazis, which, you know, fuck those guys) or violence?