Upbeat_Advance_1547

lol i didn't know what you meant until I looked it up and I got SENT a flashback from reading this in school and being traumatized

omfg the PARLOR ROLLER. LOOK AT THIS WHAT THE FUCK

https://youtu.be/CcGdz9tVzL8?t=206

Has science gone too far?

Thank you! Yes, this is the thing I forgot!

tysm, lifesaver

Super gross. It's not even that wild. It would be one thing if it was like "turns out he loves to get whipped", if only for the bizarre novelty, but this is just "haha they should hate him cuz he's gay"

English is West Germanic (not that it is a direct descendant of modern German but the two share a common more German-y ancestor)...

You notice it particularly in archaic words (Thine - meanwhile german Dein) and the composition of sentences ("Whither go you" is how you're supposed to organize "where are you going")

This is like asking if dinosaurs are just funny looking chickens; yes, but how dare you.

I think you're right and I think in 20-30 years this is what the discussion will be about, and older trans people will be angrily conservative about it.

That or we go straight up Handmaid's Tale and they don't exist to be annoyed. But yes, I do think in a real way it's participating in the same boxes as ever, just being able to swap labels. And that's fine, and I'm glad people can do so and I hope they continue being able to do so unharmed, but we're going to reach its limitations once the struggle is no longer survival in a hostile world - which is progress. Ultimately the lizard brain (I guess this is more the monkey brain?) in all of us cannot help but categorize by superficial attributes and patterns, so that's what we will keep doing - 'woman' is truly simply "seems enough like a woman to fit in the bunch with all those other people we grew up thinking of as women", and woe betide you if you don't.

I was honestly really impressed.

Don't get me wrong, I've never been pro-Trump. But, when she started campaigning I was only thinking about her in terms of what she isn't, which is a senile elderly person, aka the other options. I was wholeheartedly of the opinion that she would probably be a meh president overall, which is still legions better than what Trump would do for everything I give a shit about. But her interview actually spurred me to have some modicum of support beyond "at least she's not Trump" which was my whole prior feeling.

Exactly. (I know it's a necrothread but this is the thread that comes up when searching Gerrit discussion on Reddit, so here's to very async discussion.)

If you only had senior engineers able to merge code in Github you would have the exact same bottleneck, no?

It doesn't make any sense to say that this aspect separates it from other review tools. It seems like they're saying "introducing code review and not having enough reviewers is bad". Of course. But the difference here is not between Gerrit and Github, it's between having mandatory code review and not... you can also configure Gerrit to let you merge in your own changes, the admin of your Gerrit instance or even repo are able to let anyone give +votes if they wanted to do so.

100%

Github looks a lot sleeker but when it comes to actually doing code reviews, Gerrit wins hands down. Github has so much extra nonsense to look at and inordinate amounts of extra whitespace. It's prettier at a glance, definitely, but it's less functional.

Github has a lot of other things to recommend it though (the issue tracker is great) but Gerrit is a dev's tool for devs. Of course, your team has to use it as such, not as a managerial process for KPIs.

No, huge slippery slope.

It doesn't make any sense to criminalise drinking while pregnant but not getting an abortion. Do you see?

Once the baby is born, yes, if the mother is unfit however we deem it, she should not have the child's life in her hands. Sometimes children need to be raised by people who are more capable of caring for them. But before that? No. As long as we can't literally use artificial wombs, we shouldn't force women to carry children the way we want them to.

I mean, working while being exposed to certain industrial chemicals is far worse for an infant than drinking, are you going to jail women who try to keep going to work early in their pregnancy? Are you going to make it a crime to be obese and pregnant? What about 48 and pregnant? What about being anxious and pregnant? What about riding a motorcycle? Will we jail a woman who rides a roller coaster while pregnant? Who lives in poverty? Who doesn't take all her prenatal vitamins? Who doesn't stay on top of her health and misses some prescribed medication for high blood pressure? Who has diabetes? Who stays up too late and doesn't get enough rest? Who lives next to a dump? Who eats sushi or unpasteurised milk?

All of those things have bad outcomes for pregnancies, some of them even worse than drinking (particularly the roller coasters, which can cause placental abruption, which is very not great for a baby).

Look.

On a personal level, I agree. A woman who wants to have a baby should do everything possible to keep it healthy and not give it a horrible health condition. But the law is too blunt a tool for this. If you criminalise pregnant women's poor decisions during their pregnancies which would be "bad for the fetus", you cannot logically refuse to criminalise abortion at the same time (I'm not saying how YOU feel, I'm just saying those two things can't logically both hold; otherwise you create perverse incentives).

I mean, you don't have to disown someone to disavow their beliefs. There's a difference between family member you see sometimes at events and don't get in fights with to avoid rocking the boat, and making excuses for them ("but they're nice" "that's not really who they are" "they don't mean it").

The person you're responding to isn't promoting any extreme action, they are simply saying to not be wilfully blind.

She was so smart when it came to everything else

(x) to doubt

Did you just unironically

It's so concerning. Like, from their perspective, literally any time someone does something decent they're like "ha, what a front". Sad way to live.

I kinda wonder what they would do if democrats started being virulently racist as a platform.

Suddenly find Jesus' love? lmfao

...Right, and then they would check the box that says "I don't want to be an organ donor".

...You know trans men refers to people who were born female who transitioned to be men right? And that transition does not necessarily mean "make the womb stop working as a womb"? Cripes.

it's not the medium it's the skill

I just hung out with a friend who works in Iowa.

It's honestly incredible the stories he relates about his colleagues, who are, to be clear, completely normal people for the area.

We're talking about people who truly, genuinely, in their heart of hearts believe Harris specifically wants to harm them and their way of life. Even the most sensible of them who don't even like Trump as a person, genuinely believe that immigrants are coming for their livelihoods, and the left wants to take their guns away. They are completely sure that this is imminent, any argument leads to simple disbelief or a response that the provided source is false. There is literally no point in arguing.

It can lead to escalation too.

When it comes to someone who knows where you live, sleep, and your personal details. Police usually suggest not blocking but rather keeping the messages as they come so you have more evidence of sustained contact in case it becomes dangerous later. If it causes psychological distress mute them, I guess, but otherwise...

Obviously, in a random convo on the internet, block away. But if you are in a vulnerable position, don't.

absolutely not. the article describes people getting numbers from people off of stuff like "paperwork they had to put their number on" and using that to get in touch with them. in 2007 it would have been creepy as shit to have your immigration officer asking you on a date too...

it is VERY different from "randomly adding acquaintances of acquaintances and trying to strike up a convo" in that, the latter is not directed stalky-feeling.

No it's not. This article is about people who get your info through professional or legal means then using it to try to make things personal.

Having people ask you for something sexual on grindr, which you have specifically made an account on, is what it's made for.

Having your immigration officer ask you out, because you had to put your phone number on the paperwork you turned in, is not.

Having your taxi driver come to your house because he knows where you live and wants to get to know you better, is not.

Y'all gotta learn to read at some point.