Yeah it’s just being angry about the fact that the Earth is rotating ball. Wanting to abolish timezones is different from Flat Earth only be degrees.

Sure the “what time is it there?” question goes away, but it’s replaced by “what are your business hours?”

Ultimately it will be daytime in one part of the world while it’s night in another part of the world. That will always cause problems.

This is actually the best approach.

Obviously they are getting timezone information otherwise the app could only display whatever time the user entered in.

If you want to sort things by the actual time, it’s simple and performant if all of the times are in the same timezone, and UTC would be the standard one to use. Pushing the timezone calculations to the client makes sense because the UTC time is correct, it’s just a matter of displaying it in a user friendly way, ie. show the time in the user’s timezone.

The “get your name out there” idea is the problem.

For a third party to be successful they’d need to first build a massive grassroots movement behind it. That takes a lot of effort and may not be successful.

And what happens if you build that grassroots movement but the Democrats say “hey people seem to care a lot about this issue so lets put it on the platform.” Then what if the Dems actually deal with that issue? Well then that grassroots movement was a success! Except the leaders of the movement may not “get their name out there” as their name isn’t on a ballot that everyone sees.

Basically US third parties are mostly about giving name recognition to a few individuals (who may or may not have brain worms) so they can get on TV and have some notoriety. People voting third party feel like they’re sticking it to someone… when really the people they’re sticking it to don’t have enough votes to do much and the people they’re voting for just want to be on TV.

Bernie does it the right way. Build a base of support to influence people who will then influence the politicians.

Most politicians are going to make platforms based on polling numbers and a general sense about what the voters want. Kinda how things are supposed to work in a representative democracy. The politicians are supposed to represent the people when passing laws and setting policy.

As nice as it sounds in theory to be able to check a box beside the name of a person that agrees with you already, it’s just not feasible because everyone has different ideas and different priorities. So you gotta check a box beside the person that’s most likely to be sympathetic to your ideas and priorities (and actually has a shot of actually being a representative) and then make some noise to convince them they should do something about the issues you care about.

It can be more than superficial. If you’re restoring files from your old PC to your new one, it could make a mess of things if the user account is in a different path. Probably not a lot of people write scripts for their windows PC, but those could break.

Sure it would be a janky restore or janky script if it was explicitly specifying the path of the home directory instead of the environment variable. But environment variables have been janky in the past on windows, so it’s best to just keep the paths as consistent as possible when migrating to a new system.

Kinda shit they just wouldn’t prompt you for what you want your home director called tho.

Also, LOL at your email address.

I saw an article about them attacking Lebanon now.

Hezbollah, not Lebanon. Please don’t legitimize terrorist groups by considering them to be the government of the country they operate in. Lebanon has elections, please support democracy and it’s not consider Hezbollah as Lebanon’s government, even if those psychopaths have control over a significant portion of the country.

That being said, Nasrallah is probably under significant pressure to do something to help Hamas in some way. Last week he put out some threats against Israel. Israel put out counter threats. In all likelihood that’s where things will stay, neither side wants a war with the other.

The media is always saying a war is imminent. Remember when they were claiming China was going to invade Taiwan any minute? There’s probably some outlets that’re still are saying that sometimes. It gets clicks, views, and ratings.

Who knows they might be right this time (a stopped clock is right twice a day) but it seems doubtful.

So, where will it stop?

In terms of Gaza, Hamas is still holding Israeli hostages. It’s not going to stop as long as Hamas is holding Israelis hostage.

Hamas is likely making a lot of money from the suffering of Palestinians. So they don’t have much incentive to release the hostage and put an end to the conflict.

So it will continue on as the IDF goes house to house trying to find the people that Hamas took on October 7.

Eventually either the IDF will find all of the hostages or Hamas will release them. Then it will end.

Wow you went in deep down the rabbit hole there.

As we all know Hamas unchecked friendly fire when they started the server, so nothing in Gaza was damaged by Hamas. So when they engage in a firefight with the IDF, their bullets and rockets have no affect on the property or the people in the area.

Critical thinking isn’t exactly your strong suit, is it?

Ah, so you’ve got a mental block about October 7. Got it.

Gonna keep on disregarding any fact or logic that conflicts with the narrative, huh?

Another day, another thing for you to rage over, right? Gotta maintain that outrage or you might think about how horrible Hamas is.

That would imply that al Jazeera knew October 7 was going to happen in advance. Is that what you’re saying? Or is October 7 such an inconvenience to the narrative you want to believe you’ve got a complete mental block on it?

The US wants stability in the Middle East to keep the oil flowing.

You don’t seem to understand a lot about history with regards to Jews. Someone can consider themself to be a Jew if they are in the Judaism religion, and they can consider themself a Jew If one or both of their parents are Jews. Sometimes people that don’t consider themself to be a Jew can be considered a Jew by others even if just one of their Grandparents were a Jew.

All of these have been oppressed in the past. Oppression of Jews generally goes in cycles. Tolerance for a few generations, but then animosity builds up over time. Since Jews are a minority group they’re an easy target, and if a minority group achieves any measure of success people become jealous and a minority group having success runs counter to white supremacist ideology. Paranoia builds up, lots of conspiracy theories around Jews being successful because they used manipulation and took things that rightfully belonged to someone else.

Then a massacre happens and most people are horrified by it. So the majority of people go back to tolerating Jews again. But after a few generations people go back to the paranoia and jealous hatred against a minority group for achieving any kind of success.

The last cycle when antisemitism reached it’s maximum, there were no countries that offered sanctuary to Jews. I don’t think that will be the case on this cycle because while there’s few people left who personally witnessed the holocaust, most people in positions of power at least knew someone who was affected by it. But on the next cycle? What happens if the people that say October 7 was justified are the majority and are in positions of power in the west? The tankie pro-Palestinian protest kids of todady will likely be the MAGAs of tomorrow. It’s easy to see the potential of repeat of every country in the world refusing to offer sanctuary to Jews that are the victims of oppression.

And that’s why Israel exists. It’s not a religious state. It’s also not an ethno-state. It’s a state that exists to provide sanctuary for victims of antisemitism. A lot of people are uncomfortable with the existence of Israel because it’s a reminder of our failure to have any level of humanity towards Jews in the past.

I hope there’s a day where it isn’t necessary for there to be a country that has a Jewish majority to ensure there’s at least one country that offers sanctuary to Jews during times of peak antisemitism. But seeing attacks on synagogues and attacks on Jewish businesses in the west, we’re unfortunately not there yet.

Hey it’s not my fault that you’re not good at logic.

I can prove objectively that religion is bad for humanity. Can you do the same about atheism?

Sure… there’s a very large number of people that were killed by atheists like Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot etc. There’s a large enough sample size to objectively prove that when atheists are in power they are as bad (if not worse) than religious people in power.

you told me to doubt the tings I read on the internet. Id I didn’t doubt what you’re saying, that would be contrarian.

Because Israel is a Jewish state?

I tend to say Jew when when someone trends towards hating all Israelis, because hatred towards Israel is a common dog whistle for antisemites. After the “It’s ok to criticize Israel” meme went viral, many antisemites did a find and replace on “Jew” and changed it to “Israeli”. Those same antisemitic conspiracy theories most people would immediately denounced by most people before are now commonly spread simply because one word was changed. When I see those conspiracy theories espoused with one word different from the original, I bring it back to the original version. Why would I pretend that I don’t know the intent for these conspiracy theories?

Sometimes it’s important to take what you’re saying and put the word Jew in there. If what you’re saying about Israel suddenly becomes uncomfortable when “Israeli” is replaced with “Jew”, then you should consider more carefully what you’re saying. Someone says “wipe them off the map” they are talking about the ethnic cleansing of Jews after all. Or do you honestly believe that those that want Israel wiped off the map would displace Arab Israelis along with the Jewish Israelis? Come on…

The trick to avoid being a racist is introspection. Some consideration about whether your thinking is being guided by racism every now and then. If it’s uncomfortable to hear your rhetoric being applied to Jews rather than Israelis or “Zionists”, then maybe you should be checking how you’re thinking about things a little more.

If me considering your rhetoric as being against Jews makes you uncomfortable, then good. Your discomfort might lead to introspection.

“They think they’re too good for pizza because we’re paying them too much!”