• 0 Posts
  • 65 Comments
Joined 7 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 5th, 2024

help-circle



  • You’ve fundamentally misunderstood this. Upholding Constitutional law cannot undermine the democratic process which it establishes.

    If I win a game by breaking its rules I am de-facto disqualified from that victory. Yes, all law is written by people, can be unmade by people, and is only in effect so long as we collectively agree to enforce it, however; if the law is not unmade and if we collectively sigh in apathy at its violation then we are no longer playing the game the rules have defined.

    This is the immense danger of the current Constitutional crisis. If there is no enforcement of the rules set forth in a government’s founding document then it can no longer be recognized as the body which that document defines.


  • I do. Thanks. You’re still focused on the wrong thing here.

    Section 3 of the 14th Amendment does not require any specific test which defines “insurrection”. The impeachment is a useful anchor for establishing an agreement that an insurrection did occur and that Trump was, at the very least, an active participant in that insurrection.

    The Insurrection Bar to Office: Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment (crsreports.congress.gov) provides an well crafted and neutral review of this. Its closing sentence is particularly relevant to our back and forth:

    Congress has previously viewed Section 3 of the Fourteenth Amendment as establishing an enumerated constitutional qualification for holding office and, consequently, a grounds for possible exclusion.

    Republican strategy has long revolved around the targeted devolution of norms. They hide in the cracks between definitions which assume good faith participation in the labor of mutually consensual governance and shield themselves in perpetual faux-victimhood. If Congress does not pursue the execution of Section 3 it is nothing less than an abdication of their duty to their Oath of Office.

    Your last paragraph is a result of misunderstandings and assumptions on your part.





  • It’s not too late. The 14th amendment Section 3 specifically prohibits an insurrectionist from holding public office unless a special Congressional vote is held and passes with a 2/3rds majority.

    Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

    All US citizens should call their representatives and demand they uphold their sworn Constitutional duty to refuse the certification of Donald Trump’s victory as he is disqualified from holding office.

    This is not speculation. Donald Trump was successfully impeached for inciting insurrection. The US is in the middle of a Constitutional crisis which Congress must resolve.

    Finding your reps is easy. Go here:

    https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member

    Either let the site use your location or enter your home address. It’ll pull all the info you need in one click.



  • It’s clear you’re arguing from ignorance as your argument is patently absurd.

    The judgement is partisan, inconsistent with established case law, and relies on (at best) specious distinctions between “information service” and “telecommunication service”. Griffin creates a distinction without a difference to manufacture the perception of judicial leverage where none exists.

    It’s like arguing the DEA has no purview over cannabis because the Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1973 refers to “marihuana”. It’s clear what the intention of the law is even if the language is imprecise. To argue that ISPs provide some new class of service that’s legally distinct from all other telecom service and therefore immune to regulation is an argument made out of ignorance, stupidity, corruption, or some combination of the three.


  • derektolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldnow I know why
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    9 days ago

    The features would break if they were built in.

    You can’t know that and I can’t imagine it would be true. If the plugins many folks find essential were incorporated into GNOME itself then they’d be updated where necessary as a matter of course in developing a new release.

    GNOME has clear philosophy and they work for themselves, not for you so they decide what features they care to invest time and what features they don’t care about.

    You’re not wrong! This is an arrogant and common take produced in poor taste though. A holdover from the elitism that continues to plague so many projects. Design philosophy leads UX decision making and the proper first goal for any good and functional design is user accessibility. This is not limited to accomodations we deem worthy of our attention.

    Good artists set ego aside to better serve their art. Engineers must set pet peeves aside to better serve their projects. If what they find irksome gets in the way of their ability to build functionally better bridges, homes, and software then it isn’t reality which has failed to live up to the Engineer’s standards. This is where GNOME, and many other projects, fall short. Defenders standing stalwart on the technical correctness of a volunteer’s lack of obligation to those whose needs they ostensibly labor for does not induce rightness. It exposes the masturbatory nature of the facade.

    Engineers have every right to bake in options catering to their pet peeves (even making them the defaults). That’s not the issue. When those opinions disallow addressing the accessibility needs of those who like and use what they’ve built there is no justification other than naked pride. This is foolish.

    Having a standardised method for plugins is in my opinion good enough, nobody forces you to use extensions. And if you don’t want extensions to break, then wait till the extensions are ready prior updating GNOME.

    I agree! Having a standardized method for plugins is good, however; the argument which follows misses the point. GNOME lucked into a good pole position as one of the default GNU/Linux DEs and has enjoyed the benefit of that exposure. Continuing to ignore obvious failures in method elsewhere while enshrining chosen paradigms of tool use as sacrosanct alienates users for whom those paradigms are neither resonant nor useful.

    No one will force Engineers to use accessibility features they don’t need. Not needing them doesn’t justify refusing the build them. Not building them as able is an abdication of social responsibility. If an engineer does not believe they have any social responsibility then they shouldn’t participate in projects whose published design philosophy includes language such as:

    People are at the heart of GNOME design. Wherever possible, we seek to be as inclusive as possible. This means accommodating different physical abilities, cultures, and device form factors. Our software requires little specialist knowledge and technical ability.

    Their walk isn’t matching their talk in a few areas and it is right and good to call them to task for it.

    Post statement: This is coming from someone who drives Linux daily, mostly from the console, and prefers GNOME to KDE. All of the above is meant without vitriol or ire and sent in the spirit of progress and solidarity.




  • That would be apatheism. It’s not an alternative to the other claims but a disinterest in the problem space itself.

    Atheism is a spectrum of opinion ranging from “I neither accept claims including gods nor put forward alternatives” to “I claim no gods can exist and here’s why” with some wiggle room on both sides as the arguments devolve or extremify.

    Agnosticism is a strange participant as it lacks a cohesive definition. It’s more like a spectrum of reasons “adherents” think the claims made by others aren’t valid. It’s the last port of call for participants embroiled in philosophically rigorous metaphysical tedium and first stop for apatheists so disaffected they’ve never read a relevant text.



  • Hey. ADHD diagnosed person here. Only diagnosed this year after a lifetime of feeling like a lazy former gifted kid. This looks a lot like my over-analysis spiral from a few years ago. My psychiatrist broke it down like this:

    ADHD, like most things, is a spectrum. If your brain and body have trouble regulating norepinephrine then you’re probably on that spectrum. There’s no stolen valor here… Only treatment options based on diagnostics (educated guesswork). You meet the diagnostic criteria and I am confident that treatment is your best path forward to mitigate and control the reasons you scheduled time here in the first place.

    </paraphrased_dr_words>

    Some days my symptoms do not get in the way and I could easily pass for neurotypical. On “bad brain” days I feel like I’m losing my mind. Neuro-divergence is complex and life is weird. A diagnosis isn’t about having direct answers: it’s about narrowing down which mitigations, meditations, and medications we want to trial to increase our control over and quality of our lives.

    If you accept that ADHD diagnosis, start treating it, and the treatment improves your life, that’s a huge win. If it doesn’t? Also a win. You’ve eliminated an option via experimentation and you know more about yourself. Time to try the next option. The important bit is being receptive to the attempt at making your life better.



  • TL;DR: Check out the KeyChron K3 V2 Non-Backlight edition. Decent quality, inexpensive, no lights, and no knowledge required.

    ZSA make good stuff, sell it at reasonable prices, provide incredible support, and give a shit about artists/humans/the world. Any time mechanical keyboards are mentioned I feel compelled to inject their name into the conversation. I’ve owned a Moonlander for a while now and I have nothing but good things to say about it. I’d recommend the ZSA Voyager for someone checking out not shitty keyboards for the first time.

    With that out of the way: it’s tough to find a lightless mech keyboard these days because backlights make sense and, so long as you’re putting lights behind keycaps, you might as well use full color range LEDs and let the user set a low brightness white color or turn them off if they don’t care for it. Some companies make non-backlight versions (KeyChron’s K series for instance) but they’re a rarity. Why produce and stock inventory that’s not moving?

    I recommend doing some research on how mechanical keyboards are built (watch a 10 minute video on the internet) and then using RTINGS’ keyboard table for some comparison shopping. You’re looking for a well rated keyboard with hot swappable PCBs designed to accommodate south-facing LEDs (they point down - less bright). One of the advantages of going mechanical is customization. Don’t want the LEDs at all? Remove them from your build. Even without PCB hot swapping: no one will stop you desoldering LEDs from your keyboard.

    Building out something like a Gem80 from NuPhy or a 60HE from Wooting will net you a high quality mechanical keyboard that won’t get in your way but is customizable enough for you to avoid RGB-induced eye sores.


  • The only effective answer to organized greed is organized labor.

    Unionizing every industry so there is nowhere for the owning class to practice naked greed sans consequence or feel any pressure to do otherwise is our only answer. It’s not one which matches the aesthetic or level of ease most are looking for. So that’s the current goal. Shift public perception of unions and collective bargaining from “talking about that will get me fired” to “unionization is essential for any working class person”. Shift the current climate from “violence is inevitable” to “striking is necessary”.

    Our owners cannot steal our wages if we refuse to produce goods and services for them. Yes this means workers will experience pain. Not being able to pay bills, buy groceries, etc. This is the intention of the current economic reality we find ourselves locked in mortal combat with. Keeping us too scared to bite the hand that feeds for us to realize we can starve out our oppressors by doing nothing and being loud about it. Picketing is a siege on the fortress of oligarchy.

    They concentrate wealth like dragons protecting a hoard not for the love of money. It’s not about the money. It’s about insulating themselves so securely from such a siege that we starve before they do. History tells us that’s a winning strategy. It’s how the aristocracy survived and evolved into the modern era. Knowing this we can reason about what is necessary to avoid repeating the past.

    One may argue for governing reforms, better voting systems, government-backed protections for workers, more public sector jobs/industries, kai ta hetera, et cetera, and so on… And these things may help voters weed out elitists/sympathizers or insulate an industry for a few decades. They are placations though. Not solutions. These capitulations leave workers in stasis and package today’s injustice up as an inheritance for those next in the human assembly line. That sounds like deja vu to me.

    Similarly goes violent direct action. Yes, the civil rights movement was lifted by the pressure or the threat of violence from aligned and allied movements and, yes, such methods may yield short term results in any righteous struggle. No, workers do not require the same assistance for success. Labor is not fighting against any government. Governance is the medium through which the owning class wishes to arbitrate. Refuse this entrapment. No one is coming to save us.

    Organize, vocalize, and strike, or lose.