HereIGoAgain

You mostly jest here i think but that seems to be the actual strategy and logic of progressive activist types so often. I mean all side tend to stick with their groups but progressives seemed to have created an argument that demands disassociation and disengagement with people they deem transgressive to the approved opinions and positions on so many issues.

That's circular nonsense. It makes you someone who doesn't want others to have speech. It's not self defeating, it's the entire point of defending universal rights, especially speech.

You throw around terms like "Dehumanization" while referencing people you specifically disagree with using names like "tyrants".. without even hint of irony.

Fallacies, like the paradox of tolerance specifically, is a paradox expressly because it makes the invoker guilty of the very thing they justify their actions on. Even as a flawed and useless concept (in a free society at least) it was only ever meant to be used theoretically as a last ditch emergency response. And certainly not simply as means to control unfavorable or illiberal thought.

Worse yet, it's all predicated on the claims that "they would have totally did it to me if i didn't do it first" Which brings up the other flawed aspect of the concept.. It becomes a race to silence the other side first.. Of course that's assuming it was the intent of both to begin with. Not used merely as a tool of political oppression.

Yeah, the idea that this is simply, mostly or even partly about engagement/eyes is bunk on it's face. I'd even argue it a bad faith position to defend.

Cool

Don' let the door hit you on the way out i guess. I mean it sounds mean but the scene can do with less toxic types like this, who try to bully people who know better, in order to get their way. Even worse in this case since he actually tried to create a social media shit-storm against those he disagreed with.

He even has defenders calling for yet more CoCs in order to better "deal with" people who "get in the way." It doesn't get much more toxic than that.

All the extrajudicial stuff is pure political and ideological wank by a subset of ideological extremists. Pay no attention to any of it. It's an attempt to redefine the term for narrative creation purposes.

The short of his rant is that he wants a "Code Of Standards for maintainers" in addition to a CoC, in order to witch hunt people he feels "gets in the way."

Yikes, this is EXACTLY what Linus was talking about except an order of magnitude worse!

For the sake of this issue here, does it matter which is used i wonder, because I have been unable to find any source willing to spell it out. (that is, is simply turning it off on the adapter enough)

IPv6 has been disabled at the adapter level on my system for years. Or does it have to be reg edit and all too?

Yup, I've been waiting to see someone point this detail out in response to the rosy adoption numbers.

This

Jokes on them, i've had IPv6 disabled at the adapter level for years.

It's even worse than that. Even if these did work, the goal isn't just to make it harder.. These will act as a chilling effect on viewing, the first time there is a security risk, or it become convenient, the information will be out there. Or at least the risk and fear of such.

Number 02 is one of the major one i was thinking of. This shit is evil. I don't see them surviving long if they ever attempted to push this crap.