JarJarJedi
Streamlined derailments and counteridea reeducation
User ID: 1118
JarJarJedi
1d ago
While putting full or even equal responsibility on Poles would be ridiculous, it is also an historic fact that Poles (e.g. Armia Krajowa) were not exactly friendly to Jews and committed various atrocities (not at the level the Nazis did). Example: https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/1946-us-document-reveals-poles-treated-jews-as-badly-as-germans-did-543940 (I don't necessarily agree with the title, but it contains some evidence to that) So the claim underlying the offense is real, and that's something the Poles, understandably, are not very happy to discuss. Bit it's a part of history too. It doesn't remove any responsibility from the Germans, there is a lot of blame for everybody to get their part.
JarJarJedi
1d ago
I am not sure who to believe because in my area (very red state with a lot of Mormon and Evangelical presence) there are virtually no presence of groypers or groyper-adjacent propagandists, as far as I could see, but I am not sure who to believe about what happens in DC - and what happens in DC may have much more influence on the national politics.
I'd like to read Ross Douthat's view on that (link?) but I think it won't be able to convince me, on this stage, that groypers aren't a problem for Republicans. I may be very wrong on the size and importance of that problem, but it is the problem nevertheless. And it's not only a problem from my POV (which is obvious - I am not going to vote for a politician that genuinely considers me subhuman evil monster, whatever other position he could hold, I am only a human and have my limits) but from purely practical purpose - most of the normies won't flock to a platform that enables edgelords so far out of the consensus. At least unless they have something very attractive to offer, which groypers don't. And, also, if you want to bank all in on hating the Joos, there is enough competition to vote for on the other side, so you don't have any advantage even if you embrace that oldest of all low roads. Maybe if they ignore them enough they'd just wither away. Why couldn't we get lucky just this time?
JarJarJedi
1d ago
That could be so, but to change them, you will need to make those people active and on your side. And to make homeowners actively on your side with the message "you home price just dropped, we will make it drop even further!" does not look like a winning strategy.
JarJarJedi
1d ago
The local zoning codes are as they are not because of some random accident. They are such because usually people want them as they are - or are ok with them as they are. What would make them change their minds? If housing markets suddenly drops - e.g. because it became harder to get a mortgage - then they are unlikely to say "well, let's make it drop even further by increasing supply now!".
JarJarJedi
1d ago
The main question is: did you pay for accessing that platform?
The main two reasons why trackers are used are actually same reason, but in two instances. It's behavioral tracking. Internally, it is used to see how the site performs, which functions are used and which are not, what links are clicked, which options are selected, etc. etc. This happens in every single project I've ever seen, and it can be (actually, will be) both client-side and server-side. The former is visible to you, the latter is usually not, but it's always there. If it's a paid product, it will be used to make more people pay more money for the product - and for the provider to spend less money on providing it (e.g. by optimizing it or shutting down options that aren't used). Some of it can also be outsourced, because not everybody is an expert in properly doing that, and there are shrink-wrap solutions that can do a lot of it for you.
If you didn't pay for it, then somebody else did. Usually via ads, which serve two functions - one obvious, exposing you to the information the advertiser wants you to see, another unobvious, collecting the same behavioral information, for the same purposes, but for third-party advertisers or marketers. This also has a lot of specialization, so ad platform may have its own tracker and also use a third-party tracking solution to track some aspect that their own tracking doesn't provide. Finding high level of third-party tracking on a private paid platform is usually a case for a beef with the provider - though some providers are big enough to pull it off (like ads on Netflix - what you gonna do, stop streaming?) I.e. if you have no alternative, then why not make a quick buck on the side?
That said, 230 sounds like a very high number - even with what I said, that many separate tracking items look excessive. Though if it counts tracking events then it's plausible - depending on how much things are being tracked and how diligent are the tracker developers on optimizing the performance (not always their best suit since their competitive advantage lies elsewhere) it certainly can get that far.
JarJarJedi
1d ago
Of course. But the politicians who don't offer the voters some goodies also wither away and are replaced with ones that do. It's easy to discuss theory but when the question is "do you have a chance for your family to have a home or you'd need to move to some bumfuck place in the middle of nowhere to afford it, or rent increasingly shittier apartments for your whole life" - how many people would be disciplined enough to still maintain "the government should not have any role in it"? Sadly, not so many. The politicians successfully sold the nation the dream of "every family can own a house" (with some sad exceptions of course, but you don't want to be a sad exception, you want to be a normal family) and now it is expected to deliver on it, and if certain politicians don't, then others will replace them who do.
JarJarJedi
1d ago
And yet in all other markets people take losses all the time while still not wanting
Not the same "people". Most individuals that participate in stock market, for example, do that via relatively safe vehicles, or if they don't, it's commonly understood as being a very high-risk activity. Buying a house is understood as a part of being a responsible adult. If that results in massive losses, you'd have a lot of very angry people around who would demand the government to "do something about it" - and since we have a democracy, people usually get what they want, for better or (usually) for worse.
JarJarJedi
1d ago
"Prices falling" means massive amount of underwater mortgages - we all saw how much fun that is - and also massive budget problems in every place that relies on property tax income.
JarJarJedi
1d ago
A lot of people discover they have no hope of ever buying a home, and probably elect some asshole that promises them to fix it quick and easy, usually by taking other people's money who don't deserve it anyway, and it'll get only worse from there.
JarJarJedi
1d ago
Went back to Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. I tried to read it once and got to about the middle and abandoned it because I just couldn't make any sense out of it. On the second attempt, I kind of understand what he's talking about much more - not exactly agreeing or liking everything, but at least I now understand what's going on. Willing to see how far I get this time and if I can get to the end without losing it again.
Also after finishing Asimov's autobiography that I mentioned a while ago, I realized I never got to read the prequels to Foundation series, and read Prelude to Foundation. Which was pretty decent, but a bit underwhelming - maybe a curse of all prequels, since reading the Foundation series (a long, long time ago) was so exciting, and the prequels do what prequels usually do - describe things that happened before the important things happened. Also, the appearance of robots there was kinda meh - yeah, robots, so what, nothing really changed. So I got exactly what I should have expected, which wasn't bad, but also wasn't an absolute must read. I'll probably read Forward the Foundation next sometime soon.
JarJarJedi
1d ago
Generally true, but in this case I think it reflects the real state of affairs. See also on Groypers: https://roddreher.substack.com/p/what-i-saw-and-heard-in-washington
JarJarJedi
6d ago
Hamas says fighters holed up in Rafah will not surrender | Reuters
I am not getting it - where's the "crisis" there? If those Hamas dudes want to sit in the tunnels, let them. They may stay there until their expiration date and nobody would be worse off for it. If they try to come out with weapons, they'd be dealt with. Why there are any "talks" at all? If they don't want to submit, let them rot. It's not like those are infant children or something. How insane it is that Israel is supposed to beg the enemy that they captured to surrender and offer them "talks"?
JarJarJedi
12d ago
You build the clown world, you get the clowns. If nothing is supposed to make sense, it's not exactly a surprise a particular nonsense - a man claiming to be a "birth mother" - is demanded to be accepted. It's only basic logic - from a false premise, anything can follow.
JarJarJedi
12d ago
Yes but for over 90% of people both inside and outside Russia there's no dichotomy here. Theoretically it exists, and there are people very passionate about it, but in practice unless one needs to make a particular political point, nobody cares about it (by nobody I mean the majority of Russia's population, of course if somebody is a Tatar nationalist, they'd care a lot). In English, there's not even a word to separate these concepts - they are both described with the same word! - but even in Russian they are often used interchangeably. I.e. if some division of Russian army attacks under Pokrovsk, one could say "Russkie are attacking", and it wouldn't sound wrong, even though the actual soldiers could be 50% Buryat and 50% Tuvan.
JarJarJedi
13d ago
Her insistence on (1) independent (2) city travel is to keep her options open for finding a better partner.
It may be not as cynical as that, at least not rationally. Seeing somebody twice a month, without trying for anything more, sounds like friendship situation. Maybe dear, close friend, maybe with, you know, benefits, but still a friendship. As an introvert, if I saw a friend twice a month, I'd say "we meet very frequently". So it may be just how this is for her - no more than that. And I would not tell a dear friend to the face "I don't want to see you any more than that, twice a month is plenty, any more and it'd get clingy" - but if that's what I want, that's how things will arrange themselves. I mean, a friendship is a wonderful thing too, just need to be clear what it is.
JarJarJedi
13d ago
There's want and there's want. I want to be a billionaire, who wouldn't? But do I spend every living second on thinking about new business ideas and trying to invent yet another startup that would make me one, or do I work in my decently paying salaryman job and enjoy my hobbies, neither of which has even a remote chance of making me a billionaire?
JarJarJedi
14d ago
Something I've read somewhere and it stayed with me something: How do you know the difference between a moral man and a jerk? A moral man says: I believe in X and therefore I must do Y. A jerk says: I believe in X and therefor you must do Y.
I'd say "emotional blackmail" is the closest term. "Manipulation" is more neutral.
JarJarJedi
14d ago
Her response was that she didn't want to feel Beholden to me, and that was the end of the conversation.
Beholden in what regard? Does she feel it'd limit her freedom of movement? If so, is there uber/taxi setup that could solve it? Or does she mean she doesn't want to owe you? If so, why not - if you're going to be a family unit, there's shouldn't be a problem like that - unless she doesn't feel ready to get that close to you.
I am not sure if I will be able to afford a home in $(CITY) in any neighborhood that she would find acceptable.
I'm not sure where is she in this picture? I mean, if you're going to live together, is she expected to contribute to this arrangement? Right now, as I understand, she's living in an expensive city - so she must have some means to maintain this lifestyle? Isn't she expected to contribute something to the future living arrangements?
I broached the idea. She shot it down immediately, citing a new concern - she didn't believe that my area would allow for a career path for her. She also said that she knows it's hard for me to hear things like that without looking at it as a problem to solve.
Why is it it that I am getting a vibe that for her it is not a problem and the current arrangement works just fine for her and she does not want to change it? I mean, by this point it is clear what you want. But is it clear to you what she wants? And if it turns out she already has what she wants, then you have a choice: either you want the same and you walk this path together, or you want something different and you have to lay it in the open and consider that it's a point where you walk different paths. I realize this may be terrifying and painful, but if you want to solve this situation - as opposed to keeping dragging it on without ever knowing where you stand - you must have clarity there. Making huge life-changing investments before you have this clarity will only hurt you more in the future - you will put yourself in a bad situation and you would put her in a bad situation, making "sacrifices for her" which she maybe didn't want you to make, and this will just create more tension and pain.
JarJarJedi
15d ago
I can totally understand it, when your country is being literally destroyed, you do what you have to do. I am sure if conducting daily gay parade in the Independence Maidan in Kiev would somehow get Ukraine enough weapons and power to kick Russia's ass, about 90% of the population would sign up in a blink of an eye. But it's not that simple, unfortunately. I'm just saying there's virtually no organic wokeness in Ukraine politics anywhere. Any wokeness you notice would be because they think it'll help them to achieve some practical purpose (and there's probably just one major practical purpose they need to achieve now). It's completely different from Western Europe where there's a large organic woke support. Again, if Ukraine would get peace and gets into the EU and so on, maybe in 20-30 years they'd develop their own woke class - EU certainly would work hard to achieve that. But right now it's just not the case.
JarJarJedi
15d ago
This concept isn't holding up well to replication btw
It certainly holds well enough for me.
you can be psy-op'd or placebo'd into having more after it's been "depleted"
Well, yes, but it's also true for many other things. Like, if you run until you exhausted and absolutely can't run anymore, if you get promised $1M or get attacked by a bear, you probably suddenly find it in yourself to run a little more. That doesn't mean however running doesn't get you tired, just that there are levels of tiredness.
I'm not claiming deep understanding of how exactly willpower works, I certainly don't have it. Just for me things that require a lot of it tend to be harder to maintain over the long time, and that seems to hold for other people too. If I hate something (exercise, diet, activity) I can push through it for a while, but the longer it goes, the more chance I'd find a way to stop doing it. On the other hand, if I feel good about doing it (note that doesn't mean it's easy - e.g. lifting or other exercise can be very tough and frustrating when doing it, or there were examples about martial arts - certainly when you're trying to get a complex technique or sparring with a tough opponent, you may experience a lot of frustration, but the whole package should still feel like you want to do it), I likely will keep doing it.
JarJarJedi
18d ago
If you aim to be an elite athlete, that makes sense. If you aim to be a reasonably healthy person with good fitness, this will get you in trouble. If you are not enjoying something, you are spending your willpower every time you do it. And however determined you are, the willpower is a limited resource. For which a lot of things are competing every day. If you do not enjoy it, you will start finding excuses not to do it. You will start unconsciously arranging things so that you would do less of it. And you will feel shitty about it, because you would know the excuses are bullshit, but you will still do it because that's the nature of human brain. And feeling shitty about it would drive you to do even less of it, maybe get rid of it altogether - with a very good and strong reason of course! - so that you stop feeling shitty. That's not a good way to do things. I mean, you can power through it - but statistically, the majority of chances are you won't. I am a big proponent of "do what works for you, and fuck any third-party opinions", but my experience tells me things I don't enjoy doing are much less sustainable than things I do enjoy doing. Even if it means I'd sacrifice some reps and some lbs for it - it's better to have some consistent reps than end up with no reps at all because you grew depressed by the whole thing.
Deportations are deportations, and genocides are genocides
True, and some deportations are ways to execute genocide. Some are not. That's what I was trying to explain. You seem to focus on "well, akshually, you should use a different word" instead of focusing on the substance. The substance is that under Stalin, there were multiple cases there whole ethnic groups were rounded up and moved to remote areas, leading to the death of some of them and destruction of their traditional way of life for all of them, in the service of soviet national policy. Which specific words you use to describe it may be an entertaining academic exercise, but it doesn't change the substantial point. Which is - the soviet modus operandi included using mass casualty actions on entire ethnic groups to further their political goals.
We can't say that the Russians were doing this to the Ukrainians
That is a good point, that there is a way of defining Russian national identity which does not make the actions of soviets "Russian", and in fact, the Russian national identity, when defined in that way, suffered as much - maybe even more - than other national identities under soviet rule. For example, the White movement (not the skin-color Whites, but the Whites who were opposed to Blosheviks about 100 years ago, those Whites) would have a good claim on that identity, and some people are still keeping it. However, one must also realize this way of viewing Russian national identity is not only a minority view, but a tiny minority view, endorsed by no official institution and only by a tiny part of Russian population. For the official Russia, and for vast majority of it population, Russian Empire, USSR, RSFSR, and current Russian Federation are largely the same, whether it concerns the culture, the official succession or the political goals. Average Russian is an imperial Russian, and he sees USSR national policy as a natural continuation of Russian Empire's national policy, and current Russia's policies as the natural continuation of those both. If for an average Lithuanian the soviet era was an era of occupation by foreign power, for average Russian - for almost every Russian, excluding a tiny minority I described above - the soviet era had been what "we" were doing, not what had been done "to us". It doesn't mean they would endorse everything that happened - surely, mistakes were made here and there - but it is still part of historical succession that most of Russians feel. For them, "the Soviets" doing something and "the Russians" doing something is virtually one and the same. The Westerners, in their common speech, follow the same pattern, USSR essentially had always been "the Russkies" - which could be attributed to ignorance, except that virtually nobody in Russia would object it either. For them, as for the Westerners, the Soviets are the Russkies. They assumed that identity and are completely comfortable with it - so there's no reason to deny them something that they believe to be true. Of course, as a logical consequence of it, that identity also includes shared responsibility for all the actions committed by the Soviets. You can't be proud of "our space program" without being also accountable for "our purges". Most normies, of course, are much more willing to talk about the former than the latter, but it comes as a package.
JarJarJedi
19d ago
I don't think that's true at all. If anything, the Western governments (at least as Europe and blue part of the US is concerned) are going to another extreme, treating any request for outside cultures to adapt their mores and behavior to the standards of Western culture as racist, and giving massive amount of deference to the foreign cultural standards. It's everywhere - from demands in schools for everybody avoiding pork in school lunches to not offend Muslims (while asking Muslims to stay away from any foods to avoid offending Westerners would be unthinkable) to criminals coming from outside cultures given massively more lenient treatment than native ones, because they are "unfamiliar" with local customs and thus should be considered exempt from the local laws. Anybody who had been reading news must be aware of it.
Note however that the case of Western governments and Stalin are radically different in one very important regard. In the case of Western government, the representatives of "diverse" culture come to the West, with their hands out for handouts, asking for help. Once admitted, they demand preferential treatment and deference to their culture - the same one that they just fled and claimed that it created conditions which require emergency rescue - and they get the full measure of that deference. Stalin, however, came to those cultures - where they lived, without being asked or invited - conquered their lands and set out to replace their culture and identity with that of "Soviet people".
If we were comparing this to, say, British conquest of Burma or similar events, then the comparison might be more appropriate - though even at the peak of their colonial pursuits, the Brits were much more adoptive of the local culture and willing to blend with it rather than eradicate it. But at least the ideological vibe had been the same. That vibe not only has long gone, it had been declared the ultimate sin of the West, for which it must be atoning forever, and this guilt is the main driver enabling the sorry state of affairs we are witnessing now on the West. Thus, your conclusion is diametrically opposite of what is actually happening.
JarJarJedi
19d ago
Your argument here seems to be "what you are saying is reminding me of a meme". I am not seeing it as a refutation of anything, sorry. By necessity, wide terms like "deportation" can encompass a myriad of scenarios, from enforcing immigration law to genocide. It is impossible and not meaningful to say "every deportation is genocide" or "none of the deportations are ever genocide". The case needs to be considered on specifics - who had been deported? Why? What was the goal of it? How the process were conducted? What was the result? If you consider all these, you will be able to see, that in case of Stalin's enthic cleansing deportations, the goal was mass removal of certain ethnicities from their traditional territories, in order to destroy their way of life and national identity and transform them into "soviet people of enthnic background", and the process had been conducted with maximal cruelty and resulted in massive casualties. An action like that, undertaken now by any Western power (the other powers of course get a pass because you can't blame the oppressed people for anything anytime) would be undoubtedly called a genocide.
I've been working with git for a long time, probably over a decade. Never seen a frontend that would replace CLI for me. And in fact I don't think there exists any frontend that would deliver on what you're asking for. It's just not how git is meant to work. You have the right to want to do different things, but I don't think any git frontends would deliver them to you, because they are mostly paving the walkways, not trying to make git look like not git.
For (1), git is usually pretty conservative about touching your files, unless you tell it not to. But yes, each command has a "force" flag which will completely ruin your day if you force something that wipes your files. I feel like asking for a tool that can't do that is like asking for a safe knife - the only safe one is a useless one, as it won't cut.
For (2) if you have one remote, you should be fine, if you have multiple ones, there some setup is requires, probably some custom scripting and hooks would help. Unfortunately, that part of git UI is not excellent - I have occasionally pushed and pulled from a wrong remote and it's confusing as hell.
For (3), by default that's how git treats it, if you're in the main repo, the submodule diffs would only be shown as "modified" without any details. If you need more stuff happening there, probably hooks could help.
For (4) that's not really how git is supposed to work, but if you never use "add" command and only use "commit" then it should be like that. Of course, some more advanced command may have implied "add" so it again can get confusing.
For (5) unfortunately I don't think it's possible, at least not with how git models the universe - it keeps the state in files themselves during merge process, so if you are in the middle of this process, that's what you'd get and I don't think any frontend can change that, unless it basically reimplements a lot of it in a different way.
More options
Context Copy link