revolvingocelot

The pilot provided firing solutions for heavy SWAT ordnance, which then subjected the ragweed people to low-level, round-the-clock saturation "being in jail".

IMHO the evidence suggests it's both -- plus, everybody knows the Tortured Artist is always going to lash out, and the Money-Men are always going to scheme. I suspect the one is used as evidentiary justification for the other, and vice versa.

...this is the Moralist analysis, anyway. Hello from the Kingdom of Conscience!

Oh, I imagine we'll keep trying. Each one of us, shaped by both the differing environments we were nurtured in, and our individual genetic nature, will try different ways and means of addressing it with you. Perhaps eventually one argument will succeed, news of its efficacy will spread, and it will come to dominate...

Why would it not be relevant? Naturally-occurring materials have a much better chance of being biologically uncontroversial when introduced to the human organism -- not that eg cyanogenic glycosides, which can kill you, don't exist in apricots, but some levels of those dangerous compounds can be processed because they've been a component of the natural world for evolutionary time. The idea that modern science, let alone modern-science-as-influenced-by-capitalism, can't properly perceive the consequences of artificial compounds is what TFA is about, and if TFA isn't convincing I invite you to consider PFAS, BPA, or leaded gasoline.

But isn't installation via curl more of a PEBKAC issue? You don't have to pipe it to a shell immediately -- pretty sure you could curl the install script and manually verify it. And isn't the CPU-might-be-spying an invariant?

One certainly cannot change how one feels about one's security, but those don't seem to be reasons Linux is inherently more or less secure than Windows...

Nothing has been presented that suggests that the teachers' union wanted this to happen. That "article", an editorial from a right-leaning source, doesn't support the claim that "the New York teachers union has made it clear they dont find how they are evaluated by test scores acceptable". In fact, it doesn't include any statements from any unions at all, direct or indirect.

If one actually reads it, it's just a recapitulation of the root-level link. "SED", the organization the editorial rails against, isn't a teacher's union, you know -- it's the State Education Department. ctrl+f for "union" in that piece, and beyond a reference to the Times Union article, the only involvement of a teachers' union is at the end, where the editorial's author claims that the union is the only beneficiary of these shenanigans, and implies that they had a dastardly hand in anointing the Assembly Speaker.

>There is more data out their to support OPs claim than yours that they are against it

Ah, but you didn't provide data, but instead a slanted editorial without the proof you trumpeted. If there were other articles from other sources that you could trivially find, why didn't you use them? Why use this and misrepresent what it said?

And, fine, you got me, there doesn't appear to be any direct link between the AQE and a teachers' union -- where I come from, the teachers' union donates to grassroots lobbyists like that, the better to improve education funding for children, because teachers are actually there to teach kids, not get fat from subsidy and shirk their responsibility. I reflexively assumed it was the same here. TBH, I suspect we're not going to see eye to eye on this because I can't conceive of a scenario where teachers would rather just turn down the standards rather than lift up their charges. What's happening sounds like an admin thing -- and indeed, both the root-level link and your editorial suggests that it's the admin, the SED, doing this. I hate to say it so bluntly, but I think your own biases are clouding your judgement as to what's happening here and why. Blaming teachers is a red herring, as teachers generally do not have control over, nor approve of, what school boards wind up mandating in the name of "cost-cutting" or "modernization".

This is delightful -- a piece of comment-performance-art!

To any confused readers, consider the second paragraph in the context of the first.

>Recently, these unions succeeded to lowering testing standards for graduation in blue states to mask the worse job they’re doing teaching our kids

The link provided shows that, in fact, the union opposed the change. This claim is a bald faced lie, and lies should be downvoted on HN.

I suggest "ecks-or". This developed in university CS labs, as a result of exchanges like "OK are we going to finish the shell project tonight or shall I just slam my head into the desk until I fall unconscious?" "Yes"

You maintain a connection to the telephone network, which the telemarketers utilize in an entirely uncontroversial way to speak with you. "Using the web" is like "having a telephone", in that I can select what I wish to experience, and screen out that which I don't.

Telemarketers have chosen to architect their business on the predicate that people trustingly pick up their phones and interact with those who call them. That social norm is fading; people screen their calls, or even use eg that Pixel phone thing in which a robot picks up, confronts the telemarketer, and texts the user.

The DOM doesn't live out there somewhere, it lives inside my browser. Being choosy about which parts actually get displayed, as opposed to dropped on the ground, isn't taking food out of people's mouths, it's my failing to adhere to a social norm of naively rendering a webpage exactly as it's sent to me. It reminds me of psuedo-moral panic about WFH coring out once-lively commercial real estate and all its downstream consequences (eg, the absence of cubicle drones needing to go out to eat at lunch hour, etc) -- who owes who a living, and why?

>- refactor "broadly" (say, "rename all variables to match the following style" or "turn this class into a dataclass like XXX" or "transform the SQL queries into builder queries using XYZ"). Often requires some manual work but it gets a lot of tedious stuff out of the way

Can you go on more about this, please? This sounds, frankly, heavenly, but the second sentence gives me pause. I guess it's not necessarily a question of how reliably it can "broadly" refactor but rather how broadly "broadly" is meant to be taken...

>- generate SQL queries at the speed of mouth

...and this? I'm not really a database guy, but I do keep hearing from them about how (eg, a database guy's) stateful knowledge of a database can result much, much more efficient queries than eg a sales guy with a query builder. Are the robut's queries more like the former or the latter?

"Genuine People Personality", eh?

>“The Encyclopedia Galactica defines a robot as a mechanical apparatus designed to do the work of a man. The marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation defines a robot as "Your Plastic Pal Who's Fun to Be With". The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy defines the marketing devision of the Sirius Cybernetic Corporation as "a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes.” ― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy