bookmarks? Sure beats wading through the mountains of pointless clickfests modern 'UX' designed sites have brought us.
Reductionist? Nah, the problem is the bloat inherent in needless expansionism. Now we have slow, overwrought versions of applications that were already been-there-done-that in 1995, except now they're on a remote site that can change/disappear tomorrow, is loaded with ads/malware, and we get to pay 'subscription' fees for this wonderful 'convenience.'
no. javascript is still a piece of shit and the concept of the scriptable browser continues to be a security nightmare. The only thing web 'assembly' does is make the malware/bitcoin miner run faster for the attacker.
I would not trade all the negatives that come with single sign on dystopias just to fund screeds written by ideologues passing themselves off as journalists.
That's the whole point. It helps keep the existing fires burning as well as encourage new spontaneous combustion. It's hard to justify clamping down on freedom when no one is angry.
Virtue signaling is inherently hypocritical because it makes a false claim of virtue to gain social power, eg "for women", "for the children", "for jesus", "for the collective good". Calling it out is virtuous because it points out the fallacy in the argument the virtue signaler is using to justify the action he wants taken. This might make him look foolish for making bad arguments but does not silence him. It's simply a criticism of his position. In contrast, virtue signalers often attempt total destruction of their critics' lives and livelihoods, from character assassination to "peaceful trucks". Sounds like the Damore incident is a perfect example.
The goal is to prevent people making opposing arguments by shaming them, instead of addressing the point they made.
No, this is what virtue signalers do, eg "you hate women", "you're homophobic", "you're a nazi", are excellent examples of well poisoning, and getting people shitcanned over made-up rubbish like 'micro aggressions' and 'hate speech' are excellent examples of systematic silencing tactics.
His problem is that he does that classic "internet rational" thing of looking up some studies that support his established view, not reading them carefully enough and ignoring the historical context.
Pot, kettle, etc.
An extremely naive person might agree that "grand wizard"
Exactly.. Just like progressives use terms like "social justice", "equality", "safe space", and "liberal" to make themselves look like great people whose ideology is worth following..
Accusing someone of virtue signaling is not the same thing as silencing him/destroying his career for 'micro aggression' or whatever idiotic socjus drivel is in play at that moment.
Even the best thumb typists are still slower on a phone than they would be (given sufficient time to become proficient typists) on a proper keyboard, display, and desktop environment. Hunt'n'peck is still hunt'n'peck, even on a glass screen.
Yeah, so we can become like Malmo, Sweden and adopt the crazy policies in Germany? I'll pass.
Borders and sane immigration policy help keep the peace between cultures with conflicting value systems. When there's mass immigration because one of those systems is markedly inferior, the migrating culture ends up bringing those same problems to the new host country.
1. They aren't tied to biometrics, which once compromised, aren't easily changed. Plus, many people find it instinctively invasive, possibly because of that reason. In contrast, passwords/x509 are easily changed when when compromised or forgotten.
2. Biometrics work as authenticators but not as authorizers.. Nothing stops someone from duplicating your biometric properties (pic of your fingerprints or irises/face) without your authorization. Not so with a password.
I don't really care where people fall on some spectrum. Their positions on individual issues are what's important. How far left a politician in the US compared to other countries is irrelevant. It's basically the underpinning of a no-true-leftist fallacy.
Slashdot Mirror
Reaction times? No. Situational awareness? Hell yes.
bookmarks? Sure beats wading through the mountains of pointless clickfests modern 'UX' designed sites have brought us.
Reductionist? Nah, the problem is the bloat inherent in needless expansionism. Now we have slow, overwrought versions of applications that were already been-there-done-that in 1995, except now they're on a remote site that can change/disappear tomorrow, is loaded with ads/malware, and we get to pay 'subscription' fees for this wonderful 'convenience.'
Unless of course it's the article that positions opinion as fact...eg 99% of the political articles posted here.
no. javascript is still a piece of shit and the concept of the scriptable browser continues to be a security nightmare. The only thing web 'assembly' does is make the malware/bitcoin miner run faster for the attacker.
then they're going to have to be charged the same taxes in order to maintain our roads.
You mean the taxes we're told we need to pay to maintain the roads, or the taxes actually required to maintain the roads?
I would not trade all the negatives that come with single sign on dystopias just to fund screeds written by ideologues passing themselves off as journalists.
They've already solved it: They don't investigate anything. They pass off op-ed as news reporting.
I guess your definition of what a 'working government' is is different from us in the US.. Deal with it.
Threats of violence != violence.
That's the whole point. It helps keep the existing fires burning as well as encourage new spontaneous combustion. It's hard to justify clamping down on freedom when no one is angry.
Virtue signaling is inherently hypocritical because it makes a false claim of virtue to gain social power, eg "for women", "for the children", "for jesus", "for the collective good". Calling it out is virtuous because it points out the fallacy in the argument the virtue signaler is using to justify the action he wants taken. This might make him look foolish for making bad arguments but does not silence him. It's simply a criticism of his position. In contrast, virtue signalers often attempt total destruction of their critics' lives and livelihoods, from character assassination to "peaceful trucks". Sounds like the Damore incident is a perfect example.
The goal is to prevent people making opposing arguments by shaming them, instead of addressing the point they made.
No, this is what virtue signalers do, eg "you hate women", "you're homophobic", "you're a nazi", are excellent examples of well poisoning, and getting people shitcanned over made-up rubbish like 'micro aggressions' and 'hate speech' are excellent examples of systematic silencing tactics.
His problem is that he does that classic "internet rational" thing of looking up some studies that support his established view, not reading them carefully enough and ignoring the historical context.
Pot, kettle, etc.
An extremely naive person might agree that "grand wizard"
Exactly.. Just like progressives use terms like "social justice", "equality", "safe space", and "liberal" to make themselves look like great people whose ideology is worth following..
Accusing someone of virtue signaling is not the same thing as silencing him/destroying his career for 'micro aggression' or whatever idiotic socjus drivel is in play at that moment.
Of course, all it takes is a few plug-in attempts to create kernel panics...or is that moral panics?
Agreed.
They're helping drive society towards nanosecond attention spans for one...
Even the best thumb typists are still slower on a phone than they would be (given sufficient time to become proficient typists) on a proper keyboard, display, and desktop environment. Hunt'n'peck is still hunt'n'peck, even on a glass screen.
Sorry, I stand corrected.
..or they can just immigrate legally instead. What a novel concept!
Yeah, so we can become like Malmo, Sweden and adopt the crazy policies in Germany? I'll pass.
Borders and sane immigration policy help keep the peace between cultures with conflicting value systems. When there's mass immigration because one of those systems is markedly inferior, the migrating culture ends up bringing those same problems to the new host country.
1. They aren't tied to biometrics, which once compromised, aren't easily changed. Plus, many people find it instinctively invasive, possibly because of that reason. In contrast, passwords/x509 are easily changed when when compromised or forgotten.
2. Biometrics work as authenticators but not as authorizers.. Nothing stops someone from duplicating your biometric properties (pic of your fingerprints or irises/face) without your authorization. Not so with a password.
I didn't make the implication. You did.
I don't really care where people fall on some spectrum. Their positions on individual issues are what's important. How far left a politician in the US compared to other countries is irrelevant. It's basically the underpinning of a no-true-leftist fallacy.
Yeah because if you don't subscribe to far left wing views, you want to kill unarmed black men...
wtf?
Compared to what? The far left outlets in other countries?
As I said, more people would listen to you if you weren't such an obvious hypocrite.