growlNark
...but that said, what is the kind of person to upload specific times and places where they were to a private corporation? What would motivate a person to do such a thing? Can you get paid for it?
This seems like an extremely low bar.
Anyway, what use is there for C++ in 2025 aside from maintenance of legacy codebases and game engines? Off-hand I'd say C++ programmers are twice as expensive as rust programmers for the same semantics, and then you're still stuck with a C++ programmer you need to figure out how to socialize with.
As it stands, it certainly does not resemble readable or parseable english.
> It seems you have an issue with just one part of it, the bill of rights. Besides property---which doesn't just mean land---that part addresses such other "outdated" concepts as speech, assembly, religion, rights of the individual in criminal investigations and trials, and a number of others. What connects all these ideas together is that they are the rights the people have _against_ government action. Things the government should not do to harm people.
Notably, we do not address material needs. It's hard to give a damn about speech, assembly, religion, and whatever people consider "rights" to mean, if we let people live on the street. It's hard to imagine an america that would feed its own people if we didn't produce such a ridiculous amount of food our food wastage is measured on the proportions of entire country's consumption.
Such an observation necessarily implies I'm going to view the constitution as broken. Who gives a damn about speech when we can't house our neighbors? The cost of housing would be quite small compared to the damage of stepping over a person to enter your workplace or home. It's just simple cruelty that persists such behavior.
But if you're traveling with your family, just get hotel rooms. Hostels only came up in the first place in response to a gripe about solo travel.
Hell, we use "design language" even if it's clearly not language; i see little reason why this should be different. And of course the rest of the non-verbal chomsky hierarchy has little relation to how most folks use the word (hell, I bet most coders can't even tell you what a regular language is despite using regular expressions).
But, particularly when it comes to stuff like bird song, it shows a lot of features of syntax. I just don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater arguing over what to call it.
My point more broadly is that prevalence of an oral tradition doesn't imply the lack of capacity to develop a written one. As Timbuktu is perfect evidence of—their libraries coexisted (and still do today) with griots, and the two repositories of knowledge seem to serve distinct functions in society.
It's also worth noting that there is strong indication that pre-colonial states in subsaharan africa well outside the horn of africa did keep written language for the purposes of managing bureaucracies. Hell, arabic was adopted in east africa many centuries before europeans ever set foot there. The technology was certainly not unknown. However, if indeed this was the case, it clearly did not spread far beyond the needs of centralized bureaucracy, nor was it likely used for what we would now call private commerce, and we have no surviving records showing the scripts.
That's largely acceptable, and certainly preferable to underproduction, for resources that we simply can't do without. Dairy was (and still is) considered one of those resources as a superfood. Now maybe milk might not hold up anymore as being so critical to childhood nutrition (though I'm skeptical), but I think the reasoning behind it makes sense.
> Tarifs just incentivize purchasing local.
Sure, they also incentivize not eating. But commodification of basic resources is nothing new to americans, I suppose.
Some things are worth everyone pitching in for. Tariffs place the burden of living here on the individual. I don't really see any benefit from this.... fuck local businesses if they can't compete. The entire pitch of living here is that we'll let the market determine every aspect of our lives; why would we not double down when it came to letting businesses fail?
It isn't necessary to let businessmen who likely aren't even loyal to the people who live here dictate how your state is run to get this benefit.
Certainly neither products have much obvious need for OLTP workloads. Hell, neither have any need for transactions at all. You're just paying them for raw CPU.
A) The sort of havoc Mao wreaked made the greatest state in the world in 2025 by any capitalist measure. He completely reversed the century of humiliation. To make him seem somehow more reprehensible than known genocidal maniac george fucking washington is laughable. At least Mao respected his own people; Washington had contempt for basically everyone around him, despite being largely unnotable before the war with the british in regards other than his wealth and social purchase and aforementioned genocidal interests.
B) I don't see how far worse havoc being wreaked by far more people is any improvement. We're a shell of a country run by multinationals mostly owned by a portion of humanity otherwise too insignificant to even count. I can't imagine Mr Washington would approve of so many white male land owners' rights being abrogated by the sort of disingenuous contract-abuse and usury that characterize our current day. We are evil as a country, and we have only the pretense of having a say if you ignore how our electoral systems actually work.
All we get with this agreement is stability, if you don't count putting people into poverty as destabilizing (it is). It's just not clear that the lawful evil america represents is better than the other sorts of democracies that specifically attempt to cripple the wealthy and not fuck over the poor.
And let me re-emphasize, private markets are generally a terrible thing for most people who aren't already being starved by their state. This does not generally result in efficient processes in the short term, and we're discovering in the long term private markets don't encourage competitiveness either.
...but when we talk about private markets (i.e., public markets of mostly private things), we neglect the real private markets, aka "platforms", aka app stores and subscriptions. These aren't even pretending to provide the benefits of market-driven societies.
The least interesting commentary you can imagine is of or from a country's closest friends. From many perspectives Europe is indistinguishable from America, except from being a little poorer.
Let's see America's (or Europe's!) earnest criticism of Kinshasa. C'mon, show us who you really are. I promise you it will only benefit humanity.
Ok? Why would we go through that when we could just chuck that bitch off a cliff and start fresh? Are you trapped in 1779 and surrounded by rich, white, landed assholes? Why would you think this document represents the values of anyone you know or love? What precise language would make you think this?
We could emphasize the actual values of the people who live here—diversity, individualism, community, education, shelter, growth, appreciation of nature, appreciation for both idk diners and jazz.
Rather than fucking property, a cancer on humanity that has not yet extracted its full harm.
Doesn't really matter when the amendments go through the same electoral structure. I.e. if the electoral structure weren't fucked, there would be recent amendments worth discussing.
Or else everyone really does want to live in a capitalist shithole where people don't have any rights worth speaking of aside from ownership of property.
But the entire premise of the private market is competition, or else it's just a blight on humanity. So the idea of a trade court seems a little silly at best, or actively enabling the worst hypothetical behavior of capitalism at the worst. If the court were really that necessary, the fundamental tenets of the alleged benefits of capitalism seem in question, and we should probably renegotiate at all costs with those who own the means of production.
This is certainly no less damning. However, it is very illustrative of our colorful history: trade above humans!
Yes, wealthy inter-state individuals would be so much better. Right?