3 ms·

Half the country is wrong. I agree that centralized ownership is a problem regardless of party, but putting on both sides blinders is not the answer.

• gjsman-1000 1y ago
  In that case, do you agree a one-party state, run by Democrats, would be "correct"?
  • judahmeek 1y ago
    [flagged]
  • ceejayoz 1y ago
    The "correct" setup is a loyal opposition during time out of power. In the absence of that, a one-party state is probably better than a two-party state in which one party is actively trying to burn the system down.
    • TrnsltLife 1y ago
      You're talking about the mostly peaceful protesters who tried to burn down the Federal building in Portland for over 200 nights, right? Sedition and insurrection.
      • ceejayoz 1y ago
        > tried to burn down the Federal building in Portland for over 200 nights If you're pissing your pants in fear of people who fail to do something 200 nights in a row, I'd argue that says a lot more about you than it does them.
  • johnnyanmac 1y ago
    When did HN become so bad at false equivalencies? Can I say Singletons are not recommended but also agree that there are contexts where it's an "okay enough" option? Singetons are never the "best option" in modern software, but it's not the "worst" in every case either. Now, filling your code base with incorrect calculations: pretty much always a bad idea.
  • judahmeek 1y ago
    In the context of election security, absolutely. After the wild amount of disproven claims made by republicans about election security, I don't trust them at all.