jfrunyon

75 ms·

841.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
You don't need IPython for startup scripts... https://docs.python.org/3/library/site.html
842.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Do you really think that losing the election is going to make the Republicans go "huh, maybe we should stop trying to take away rights from millions of Americans? maybe we should stop treating millions of voters like trash?" It&#x
843.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Neither of your paragraphs are factual.
844.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Yes, you're right, I over-simplified. Many of them are (or have) meteorologists. To give the data itself a pretty face (interpretation). But that's not the primary reason that news stations hire "weather people". If it w
845.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Except their attempted coup has successfully convinced a significant portion of the public that they are the appropriate winners.
846.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
No, it changed when capitalism got involved and realized it was more profitable to centralize, close themselves off, and gain a monopoly.
847.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
> In reality it is government actors that are twisting the arms' of tech companies to remove unapproved speech. Uhh... what? Trump and the Republicans are twisting the arms of tech companies to remove speech favoring... themselves?
848.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Well... they are.
849.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Oh, you're SO right. Fox News has so much trouble getting advertisers. So do Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones.
850.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Well I have some bad news for you, they don't believe they lost the election .
851.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Except that the facts only support one side.
852.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
It's not a balance between "enabling free speech and avoiding harmful content", it's a balance between keeping their customers and investors happy, and avoiding legal liability.
853.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Indeed, an attempted coup.
854.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
> and take away their basic rights
855.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
From what a friend (who is one of those "third party content moderators") says, they don't have a clear definition for anything, even for their own moderators.
856.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
> it's still just blatant political censorship on a massive level Uhhh... no, banning lies and hate speech is not "political censorship". That implies that lies and hate speech are legitimate political views.
857.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
No, what we need to do is stop using closed, centralized platforms which are controlled by someone whose interests are wildly different from our own. (And I don't care who you are, your interests are wildly different from Zuckerberg&#x
858.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
> noticed stuff being blocked by the left (1st amendment) Like? (And before you answer, remember that the 1st amendment applies to businesses, too.) > going after firearm ownership (2nd amendment) When has either political party &qu
859.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Oh, wow. You're right. Talking about "make lists, lock them up" is TOTALLY equivalent to "when the looting starts the shooting starts". Totally.
860.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Election integrity was not questionable in either 2016 or 2020. There were massive amounts of disinformation - both from foreign actors and from Trump - in both elections. But there was not significant fraud in either election.
861.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Trump and his enablers are literally leading an attempted coup right now and you think it's fear mongering?
862.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Except that only 50% is actually out to do it.
863.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
So... what do YOU think can be cut to free up 0.02% of their budget?
864.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
We're not discussing serving the public, we're discussing serving for-profit companies who make money off of the NWS's data. Those are the only people this policy change would affect, not you or me going to the NWS website.
865.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
I find it funny when people think that big business isn't far more wasteful.
866.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
No. The news shows have weathermen so that they have a presentable face on the data they get from the NWS.
867.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
No, the real story is that "we could slap a band-aid on it for $1.5 million, but that would only work for a little while, so why would we bother?"
868.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
> According to companies that draw large amounts of this data, the proposed limit will substantially harm the services they provide to customers. The possible negative effect on forecasts has also raised concerns among congressional lawm
869.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
Hah. You think GitHub Actions won't do the same in a few years once this has all quieted down? You have to be better than your competitors if you want to beat them. Until you DO beat them, that is.
870.
by jfrunyon 6y ago
"Secret filtering" is buggy, broken, stupid, misleading, and just plain wrong anyway. 1) If you can cause it to be run on arbitrary code then you can cause it to reveal the secret. Even if the only output you see is a pass or fail

More ›