nooyurrsdey

(Deleted)

Absurd. The opposition had none of this in their platform.

You can enumerate the failures of Dems if you'd like but casting both sides as the same is utter nonsense.

And your little dig of "without any hint of self awareness" makes me think that you think you know better.

This site is exhausting sometimes. Y'all really have the ability to pedantically pick apart everything.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you're not trolling.

3 reasons come to mind -

1. There's a vast and profound difference between trimming inefficiencies ("cutting waste") and eliminating a valuable function. It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

2. This entire administration and its main actors have given zero reason to assume what they are doing is in good faith. In fact, quite the opposite they have incited worry that their motivations are not honest.

3. They are doing this with a shocking lack of oversight, on their own terms.

This is honestly the first time I’ve ever heard someone online put their own country down and give the US some credit. I’m so used to us being the butt of anger and jokes that this is kind of refreshing to read.

But overall I think most developed countries have similar demographics here. There are powerful and vocal anti intellectuals and then there are less vocal critical thinkers.

Is there a good guide that covers that codebase? I'm very familiar with Ruby but I've never dived into the C code and I'm not sure where to start.

> It should be readable, as a complete document, in its existing text form without any transformation.

Is this _needed_, or is this nice to have?

A markup language annotates text and describes _how it should be rendered_. It feels redundant to describe how a document should be rendered (presumable for final consumption) _and_ have the document be readable as-is.

Case in point: I'd argue that HTML is a great markup language. I wouldn't call it the most readable in its current form.

I agree with the spirit here, but it ultimately feels more "nice to have" than truly required.

Love the project but I really wish projects (especially linux projects) would include a "plain english" description of what this does at the top. Like, even one sentence.

1. Not everyone knows what AutoHotkey is and what it does. I had to google it.

2. Not everyone speaks english. Diving into a description that includes words like "fault tolerant, extensible, high availability" so infuriatingly confusing.

This is a wonderful way to visualize side by side images like this.

Great work, it feels smooth and intuitive.

Emphasis mine:

> The case against the EPA was brought by West Virginia on behalf of 18 other mostly Republican-led states and some of the nation's largest coal companies. > > They were challenging whether the agency has the power to regulate planet-warming emissions for state-wide power sectors or just individual power plants. > > These 19 states were worried their power sectors would be regulated and they would be forced to move away from using coal.

I'm losing hope that anything practical can be achieved because of idealistic nuance like this. We're missing the forest for the trees. Our goal should be the larger combating of climate change, but individual players like this have amazing power to put up resistance or obstruction to that goal which is a net loss for all of us.

Only HN can be so critical of what is a really cool project.

Honestly this is a great _simple_ way to access weather without leaving my terminal. Love the basic ASCII graphics.

I noticed it's a LOT faster when I provide the city, probably because it doesn't have to look it up from IP:

``` curl wttr.in/atlanta ```

Nice work.

Nice job! Looks useful

Not everything has to offer new info. Sometimes things bear repeating, it's how we add emphasis and continue the conversation.

Coming out with "Apple is doing a poor job" just once isn't going to move the needle. People have to hear it over and over in a relatable way.

The amount of anger and negativity in this comment is shocking.

The work she does is often stereotyped as being "dumb" or non-intellectual. To fight that idea, OP found it valuable to mention how smart she is and how these platorms provide a safe and profitable way to provide for her child.

Ask yourself - and I mean really ask yourself - what about that statement has you so angry?