pallas's recent activity
-
Comment on We need empathy, not just etiquette, on the subway in ~life
-
Comment on We need empathy, not just etiquette, on the subway in ~life
pallas (edited )LinkNot having heard about the incident that prompted this, and not having that much familiarity with useful public transport in the US, all of this seems bizarre. As far as I can tell, the incident...Not having heard about the incident that prompted this, and not having that much familiarity with useful public transport in the US, all of this seems bizarre.
As far as I can tell, the incident here is that a violent passenger on public transport attacked and killed a homeless passenger who was being a nuisance and panhandling. And somehow, the author blames... the other passengers? For not having 'empathy', which appears to translate, for the author, into becoming directly involved in a violent altercation, as some sort of action heroes? Or, somehow, for not telling the killer to stop forcefully enough? Are teachers and students during school shootings in the US also at fault for not trying to confront the shooter? Is vigilantism now not only not discouraged, but somehow some moral imperative? Interestingly, it seems some people did try to tell the killer to stop, but apparently didn't do so forcefully enough for the author? Does the author live in some sort of comic book universe, where problems are solved by random bystanders happening to be cape-wearing protagonists who solve problems by punching people?
This is very confusing. I would assume that, having generally agreed in modern society to hand powers of policing and security to the state, we would not be demanding vigilantism. Would it not make sense to ask where transport security was while someone was being brazenly killed on their train, rather than demanding some movie-plot response from bystanders? Has confidence in policing so collapsed in the US that the response to a violent altercation is to add to the violence, rather than notifying authorities?
And yet, on the other hand, how is it that someone can attack and kill someone, surrounded by witnesses, and not be arrested? How is violently attacking and killing someone considered remotely a legal or justified response to aggressive panhandling, or any sort of uncomfortable interaction? How, even to take the killer's argument, does he think he is justified as a private individual in choosing to violently "subdue" someone, and how does he think he is not culpable for that person dying because he 'didn't intend' to kill him while violently attacking him? What gave him the right to act as the police? I assumed, reading the first few lines, that this would be about an instance of police brutality, not vigilantism.
Surely the culpability of the killer here is obvious? Surely, when choosing to violently attack someone in the name of vigilantism, one bears the weight of the consequences? And if, as the linked articles on the incident suggest, the current city government is interested in promoting 'law and order', wouldn't a very basic element of a desire for law and order be the confidence in being able to go on a train where people are not murdered next to you? Has policing and public safety so collapsed in the US that even governments just expect everyone to go around murderously enforcing their own views of the law?
I was actually just on a train yesterday where there was a problem with panhandling (though for various reasons, I am almost certain that the panhandling was being done by an organized group, for profit). The driver was notified, the police were called, and the situation was dealt with. Even without asking anyone, I can be reasonably confident that other passengers did not think that attacking the panhandler was a remotely reasonable response.
I apologize for the rather flippant and aggressive tone here, but none of this makes any sense.
-
Comment on Is Gmail killing independent email? in ~comp
pallas LinkOne of the frustrations for me about spam and Gmail and Office365's terrible filtering is that valid SPF, DKIM, and DMARC should be enough to prevent spam, but they aren't being used effectively...One of the frustrations for me about spam and Gmail and Office365's terrible filtering is that valid SPF, DKIM, and DMARC should be enough to prevent spam, but they aren't being used effectively from a technical standpoint and don't have the laws to make them effective legally.
SPF and DKIM effectively change an email's source from being verifiably from an IP address to being verifiably from a domain. Domains actually have costs, and are supposed to have some level of contact information. They're not as disposable as IP addresses.
So from a technical side, they could be used in a scoring system to see that a domain tends to send ham, and if so, then an SPF and DKIM passing email from that domain is very likely to be ham. It seems like Gmail and Office365 do nothing of the sort, however. They could also be used to penalize domains, or penalize registrars, for too much spam. But they don't seem to be.
From a legal side, domains have owners who should be known, and registrars who have them as clients. Countries could have laws to allow pursuit of the owners of spam domains. They could make registrars who don't shut down spam domains liable for them. But they don't: that is reserved for intellectual property enforcement. In fact, the US essentially makes spamming explicitly legal, and bans, at a federal level, any state laws against spam.
-
Comment on Is Gmail killing independent email? in ~comp
pallas Link ParentThe problem goes far beyond that. I have seen university Office365 and Gmail systems inexplicably spam-filter emails from a clean, multi-decade-static IP of a long-used mail server of a number of...Your $3 VPS with a recycled IP address just can't be trusted because they are so disposable.
The problem goes far beyond that. I have seen university Office365 and Gmail systems inexplicably spam-filter emails from a clean, multi-decade-static IP of a long-used mail server of a number of academics on a clean two digit ASN. I have a colleague who had one of the two inexplicably spam-filter emails from Nature's review system, something that no academic would ever want filtered. My personal server can deliver mail to Gmail from a static IP in my own ASN that only ever delivers my personal mail, to a recipient who corresponds with me frequently, and still end up in their spam, despite everything being configured properly. None of these are disposable.
Meanwhile, much of the spam I see on Office365 is from Gmail, which it seems very reluctant to filter, despite it seeming like the messages would clearly get caught by a Bayesian content filter.
-
Comment on Teaching myself how to cook - where to begin? in ~food
pallas Link ParentI'd disagree. I generally cooks steaks at a medium, at most. If you want to sear the exterior without cooking the interior (eg, for a steak actually cooked by sous vide, or for searing on a pan...I know I need a reasonably high temperature, and but the steak turns from rare to brown so quickly that I miss out.
I'd disagree. I generally cooks steaks at a medium, at most. If you want to sear the exterior without cooking the interior (eg, for a steak actually cooked by sous vide, or for searing on a pan and cooking in an oven), then a very high heat can make sense, but not if you're cooking a steak on a pan.
When cooking an a pan, the surface of the pan is hot, and transmitting heat to the food. The heat moves through the food, from the surface, and that takes time. If you're cooking a steak on a very hot pan, then the bottom surface is going to burn before the center warms up.
Good point on the meat thermometer - this would help immensely.
Get a good thermometer, and it will help immensely. Modern load cells in scales are good enough that, I would argue they don't have as much to distinguish them at this point—a €30 digital scale can be adequate for most cooking—but thermometers do have significant differences in accuracy and speed that matter not just for how helpful they are when used, but how quickly you'll choose to use them. I have a Thermapen One and it has been great: it's fast and convenient enough that simply putting it in anything can be informative, even something like seeing how far water is from boiling. I don't know how I'd cook a steak without an accurate fast-reading digital thermometer: the difference between a rare steak and a well-done steak can be a few dozen seconds, something that requires skill and talent without a good thermometer, and is trivial with one.
I have been avoiding olive oil for that reason, and using avocado oil for the higher smoke point, even though it's expensive (I don't fry much though).
I'd argue that if you're having problems with olive oil, your pan is far too hot. There should be no problem cooking a steak with olive oil.
-
Comment on Teaching myself how to cook - where to begin? in ~food
pallas Link ParentMeat doneness was hard a few decades ago. It is hard now only for people who don't use good modern thermometers. Try cooking a steak with a fast-reading thermometer, watching the rate that the...Meat doneness is hard, everyone will over or under-cook from time to time. I should probably get a thermometer myself, but I'm just lazy and arrogant. I use soybean oil because I'm basic, you can probably get something better if you do some research. But soybean oil works fine.
Meat doneness was hard a few decades ago. It is hard now only for people who don't use good modern thermometers.
Try cooking a steak with a fast-reading thermometer, watching the rate that the core temperature moves when it is close to your desired doneness. It's quite illustrative of how hard reliably cooking to a particular doneness without one would be, and how easy cooking with one is.
Phobia of rare meat is largely due to the fact that, historically, meat was not as safe to eat as it is today. Find a butchery, and get to know your butcher. Become friends with them if you can! That's a relationship that will bring a lot of joy, I guarantee!
Here, though, I'd agree. So much of caring about doneness is caring about safety, and the worry that, even if something tastes appetizing, it might be dangerous; this causes a tendency to overcook. When you don't need to be so concerned, it makes everything much easier.
-
Comment on Teaching myself how to cook - where to begin? in ~food
pallas Link ParentBaking recipes are exact protocols because they need to be. Cooking doesn't need to be, but that doesn't mean it can't be. Modern scales and thermometers are both very accurate and very fast and...What's very weird for me is that I'm actually a reasonable baker. I dished out a lemon tart recently and everyone was quite shocked by it. Samin Nosrat mentioned that non-baking recipes are more like guidelines than actual recipes, maybe that's why I can't seem to get them right.
Baking recipes are exact protocols because they need to be. Cooking doesn't need to be, but that doesn't mean it can't be. Modern scales and thermometers are both very accurate and very fast and convenient. When used to using them, they're arguably faster than the 'intuitive' traditional methods.
For your over-cooking, what kind of hob are you using? There's a tendency on many hobs to have poor lower settings, leading one to tend toward higher ones. As much as gas is often fêted, I've had a number of experiences where the minimum easily-obtainable setting that's stable is rather annoyingly high. With a good induction hob, and the ability to actually set a true and consistent medium, medium-low, and low, it's easier to avoid overcooking.
-
Comment on Update to Kagi Search pricing in ~tech
pallas Link ParentKagi is, I think, being reasonably transparent about costs; the problem is that their search method is, I think, intentionally unsustainable: until they have their own crawling and indexes,...I'm of the opinion, more and more these days, that complete transparency in costs to run the business is becoming a necessity for me to agree to a subscription plan.
Kagi is, I think, being reasonably transparent about costs; the problem is that their search method is, I think, intentionally unsustainable: until they have their own crawling and indexes, they're aggregating and reorganizing results from search indexes with paid APIs.
But it seems like this ends up being enormously expensive, and doomed to make their costs infeasible unless they can implement their own indexes, because it seems like they're trying to compete by paying their competitors for results, and that seems like it will just result in their competitors raising their API prices: as the post suggests, search indexes are about to become several times more expensive".
-
Comment on Update to Kagi Search pricing in ~tech
pallas Link ParentTheir justifications for the quota choices are problematic, and I'd be happier if they had simply left them out. Even though they do say that their users are not average users, and the average...Maybe the average person searches 100 times per month as they suggest, but I've just checked my usage and I did 74 on Monday.
Their justifications for the quota choices are problematic, and I'd be happier if they had simply left them out. Even though they do say that their users are not average users, and the average Kagi user is searching 700 times per month, their use of statistics for usage of free search engines to justify quota choices doesn't make sense. A user paying for a service is likely to use it; a free website is likely to have a large number of very infrequent users pulling the average down. I find it very unlikely that someone is going to pay a monthly subscription and then only search three or four times a day.
I've renewed my subscription for a year, in order to keep unlimited searches, as I've been averaging over 1,000 a month. I'm expecting that in a year, Kagi will have likely worked out its business model, or will no longer be in business.
-
Comment on Alaska says it’s now legal “in some instances” to discriminate against LGBTQ individuals in ~lgbt
pallas LinkThe title of this article does not fit the content. The quoted "in some instances" in the title is, in the text, explained as being from a page stating that "in some instances" it is illegal to...The title of this article does not fit the content. The quoted "in some instances" in the title is, in the text, explained as being from a page stating that "in some instances" it is illegal to discriminate against LGBTQ individuals. While the implication is there, the statements are different. One is positively claiming that there are situations where it is legal, the other implies there are, but could be argued to still be true if there aren't.
The article itself actually seems careful about this, and there's ample material for a strong title. There was no need to mar the article by misusing a quote in the title.
-
Comment on Crushed in ~life
pallas (edited )LinkThis seems to be the typical child entertainer drama, where most of the adults involved generally seem horrible and primarily self-interested. It has some novelty, in that, being about social...- Exemplary
This seems to be the typical child entertainer drama, where most of the adults involved generally seem horrible and primarily self-interested. It has some novelty, in that, being about social media, it appears to have involved people less familiar with California's laws around child entertainers, and businesses largely trying to operate outside of them. The results appear to be a modern retelling of the sorts of historical abuses that led to those laws in the first place.
The mother seems confused as to why the state is working against her. But in reality, it appears that the state is acting on the basis of a century of experience with child entertainers, and her behaviour, even just considering what she appears to admit to in this article, seems to be exactly that of a financially abusive parent seeking to gain control of their child's assets for their own purposes. She follows the same, tired script that the courts have undoubtedly seen countless times, and has historically played a part in some of the largest financial abuses of child actors. Yes, the law says that her son's assets are his own, not hers, but he verbally agreed to share them with her. Everyone who says they didn't agree to her getting income, and didn't know about the LLC she started, actually did. No, she's not trying to take advantage of her son's finances, she's just trying to protect him, and that protection includes controlling his finances. It's a travesty when the court gives conservatorship over her son's estate to someone he chooses, instead of her, since she only has his interests in mind. Her son, meanwhile, is being manipulated against her by immoral people who don't have his interests in mind. She's a good mother, because she has photographs of her being a good mother, while also fighting a legal battle against her son for control of his income. As an argument for why she should have guardianship over her son, she sends her son's lawyer information about a lawsuit about his work: what she focuses on seems clear. She insists that she was not naive about the exploitation of children in the entertainment business, and took comfort in California's extensive legal protections, but if she is being honest in the article, then she doesn't understand that one of the major reasons for those legal protections is to protect child actors against their parents.
Even outside of trying to gain access to his assets, her account of her behaviour seem typical of a naive but ambitious stage mother who moves to Hollywood seeking fame and fortune, and in the zeal to monetize her children, loses perspective on her relationship with them, to the extent that she doesn't seem to understand how the article makes her appear.
She recalls being uncomfortable with a trip to Las Vegas being inappropriate, but it is when there's a callback involved that she tries to have her son leave early. She is shocked that, after years of her marriage being more a business arrangement, her husband treats it like a business arrangement. She is suddenly uncomfortable with the sexualization of her son, and with the actors involved being instructed to kiss each other, years after apparently being comfortable with titles like “24 Hours HANDCUFFED to my ‘BOYFRIEND.’ " and “KISSING My Best Friends BOYFRIEND To See How My CRUSH Reacts.” Her discomfort coincidentally comes around the teenage years when one might expect a child entertainer to start questioning the financial arrangements their parents have made. She felt it would be "healthy" to conspire to push her son and a former coworker into meeting against his wishes (whether influenced or not), then lies to her son about conspiring to do so. The coworker was, of course, someone who had been in either a staged or semi-staged relationship with her son. She doesn't seem to think that publicly recounting this dishonesty will further damage her son's view of her.
Yes, it would not be the least bit surprising if the other adults involved here are also horrible. Smith is managing the production of content that seems primarily based around the sexualization of young teenagers: the very nature of the group seems abusive, using the advantage social media has in allowing content outside of that which would be acceptable in traditional media, and in blurring lines between the staged and the genuine. It wouldn't be surprising if Jentzen's father, and sister, are primarily considering business interests. But if Jentzen's mother insists that she is different, and is acting out of concern for him, then her self-admitted attempts to advance her own financial interests, to the detriment of her son and against the intent of California law, are enormously damaging to her argument.
The one thing that no one really seems to care about here—not his mother, perhaps not the article's author, certainly not Smith—is what Jentzen wants. The last two paragraphs, in that regard, are both telling and depressing. Johna wonders what would have to happen to avoid her son breaking off contact with her. Three sentences earlier, she points out that he just recently directly told her the answer: stop trying to make claims against his income and take guardianship over him. But the chance of a six-figure income for her relies on her not considering that, and so she continues to wonder what else she could do, other than what her son wants.
-
Comment on The best manual espresso makers in 2022 in ~food
pallas (edited )Link ParentI had suspected that the Flair would be a gimmick, but bought one because I was looking for a reasonably semi-portable way to make espresso. Instead, I actually found that it both wasn't a...I had suspected that the Flair would be a gimmick, but bought one because I was looking for a reasonably semi-portable way to make espresso. Instead, I actually found that it both wasn't a gimmick, and consistently made much better espresso than I expected, to the point that I now use it as my primary machine. It is better than the majority of coffee shops (largely, any coffee shop that isn't specifically focused on making excellent espresso). It makes much better coffee than the Gaggia Classics I also often use, even with better portafilters and modified pressure valves, and almost certainly makes much better coffee than the Breville Barista Express you mention elsewhere. They're not really comparable machines: Flair is making machines that sacrifice convenience and tolerances in order to vastly outperform on quality for the price, while many electric machines at similar price ranges are focused on convenience and tolerance. As an example, the Barista Express has a 16-step-adjustment grinder with a seemingly non-scale-based dosing mechanism, and includes pressurized and unpressurized filters in case you want to use pre-ground coffee; the Flair isn't really designed to use anything other than bottomless filters, and makes a mess if the grind isn't perfect or the dose is off by more than ±0.5 g.
I can control the pressure to an extent that simply isn't possible with the design of most mid-range electric machines, and can control time and extraction ratio well. Temperature control is much less of a problem than might be expected, in part because the water path is much simpler than an electric machine (no pump, no tubing, no reservoir, thermal isolation from the rest of the machine is reasonably simple, etc). While getting the process right can be tricky, it's likely that the temperature is more consistent for me on the Flair than a Gaggia Classic with no PID controller modification; there are simply far fewer uncontrollable variables. There's also the unusual benefit that I can make the same coffee with no electricity, and can leave the machine for months without any worries about maintenance, scale, clogging, or parts breaking.
But convenience is a significant tradeoff. It takes me about 4-5 minutes of active, focused work to make two espressos, using two cylinders and portafilters, and I'm a scientist who is at least reasonably well regarded for precise lab work and known for becoming somewhat overly obsessive at times. I use a first-model Flair Pro with the second-model retrofit kit, a Kinu M47 Classic grinder, a generic 0.1g scale and timer, and a Thermapen One; while I don't have the last two specifically for coffee, the cost of everything combined is likely between double and triple the cost of just the Flair Pro itself. (I also only drink espresso, and am not even sure how to use a steam wand; otherwise, that would be a significant problem.)
By comparison with a Gaggia Classic, a Capresso Infinity grinder, and a scale, I can make an espresso with about 30 seconds of comparatively easy active work. It won't be as consistently good, but it's much easier.
This has actually put me in the somewhat frustrating situation that I find the process tedious as an everyday task, while at the same time, alternative options would sacrifice at least some control and consistency, short of a setup costing in the thousands.
-
Comment on What's the best laptop for performance? in ~tech
pallas Link ParentI'm very happy with my Framework, and I'd also recommend it for regular users, but it isn't for everyone, and I'd say it's particularly poorly suited for the OP here. They want a high-performance...I'm very happy with my Framework, and I'd also recommend it for regular users, but it isn't for everyone, and I'd say it's particularly poorly suited for the OP here. They want a high-performance computer suitable for gaming, and aren't concerned about weight. They need a dedicated GPU, and likely would prefer a larger screen, while Framework, at the moment, only makes what might be described as the standard modern business laptop form factor. You can, of course, use an eGPU and an external monitor, but if you need those for your basic usage, it takes away from the whole point of it being a laptop.
-
Comment on So, uh, about the UK in ~talk
pallas (edited )Link ParentSuch was the chaos that list of members with no votes recorded is bizarre, and was a matter of some bafflement in many news sources at the time. Some Tories were abstaining in protest (eg,...Such was the chaos that list of members with no votes recorded is bizarre, and was a matter of some bafflement in many news sources at the time. Some Tories were abstaining in protest (eg, Skidmore, Richardson, and Crouch publicly stated this before the vote), while others made much less sense, beyond known excused absences despite slips being withdrawn (Johnson, Wallace). Bizarrely, Truss did not have her vote recorded initially—there were rumours that she had forgotten to tap her card properly—and later had her vote added to the record.
The main point of this, I suppose, is that it isn't right to say that "not a single Tory rebelled". Yes, the rebellions were of limited use, and could be argued to be theatre (I would argue that Skidmore's, at least, was not, while Crouch's appears to have been), but there were Tories who publicly stated they would rebel, and then, by the usual interpretation of a three line whip, rebelled.
-
Comment on So, uh, about the UK in ~talk
pallas (edited )Link ParentI think it's important to note that several Tories certainly rebelled against the whip (whether or not it was still there) on this vote. They did do by abstaining, not voting aye. They would have,...not a single Tory rebelled.
I think it's important to note that several Tories certainly rebelled against the whip (whether or not it was still there) on this vote. They did do by abstaining, not voting aye. They would have, then would not have, then would or would not have depending on what party leader you asked, then would have, had their party membership suspended or removed for this (in any normal situation, abstaining on a three line whip would have resulted in punishment). There was so much chaos in the voting and vote recording that the intent of abstentions and non-votes became rather unclear on some cases, but presumably the party knew.
In hindsight, of course, the real rebellion here amongst the Tories was that the PM's handling of the vote and whip had them force her to resign.
-
Comment on Everything you've ever wanted to know about Ethernet cables in ~comp
pallas Link ParentIt also doesn't cover the consideration of whether Ethernet cable is the right choice at all for some situations, in comparison to other options. For a long run, fibre could end up being quite a...It's a good writeup, but even 6a cable is overkill in a home. Regular 6 will do just fine unless you need to do runs > 200 ft and is available cheaper.
It also doesn't cover the consideration of whether Ethernet cable is the right choice at all for some situations, in comparison to other options. For a long run, fibre could end up being quite a bit cheaper, easier, and faster: even within the distance limits of Ethernet cables, the raw cost of the cable could end up being more than the fibre and additional hardware expenses. Shielding and isolation concerns for outdoor runs are also much simpler.
-
Comment on One month with Kagi search in ~tech
pallas Link ParentYes, if you consider a physicist who does a fair amount of programming to be a programmer. I mostly use kagi: it has worked, in my view, at least as well as Google, and it has the additional...As a programmer, quality of search results matters a lot to me - the right link can save me hours of wasted effort. I'd be curious whether any programmers have tried using Kagi or Neeva.
Yes, if you consider a physicist who does a fair amount of programming to be a programmer. I mostly use kagi: it has worked, in my view, at least as well as Google, and it has the additional advantage that you can deprioritize and block individual domains in the search engine itself (while client-side extensions exist to do this for Google, they simply can't work as well). Most programming SEO spam seems to be from a small number of domains, so this can be very helpful.
DDG, on the other hand, seemed horrible for programming spam, and was one of the reasons I gave up on using it. There are ridiculous, basic cases where, for example, simply searching for a Python standard library module will return spam above the official documentation.
-
Comment on One month with Kagi search in ~tech
pallas Link ParentThat's rather surprising to me as well. One of the bigger draws of kagi for me was that it seems better than Google (and especially DDG) at not having search results that are overrun by SEO-spam...The first paragraph kind of reads like word-salad to me, and it does sound like they're pulling from Google, which actually makes me like them a lot less?
That's rather surprising to me as well. One of the bigger draws of kagi for me was that it seems better than Google (and especially DDG) at not having search results that are overrun by SEO-spam sites. I had assumed that this was because they were making their own index.
It's not, I suppose, that surprising that they could do better here, even using the same indexes, through good processing and filtering. Many of the same spam sites show up again and again, often with the same domains: the paraphrase-real-sources sites like w3schools, the innumerable-bad-articles sites like geeksforgeeks or towardsdatascience that always seem a bit like they're computer-generated off a line or two of information fed to some algorithm, the scrape-and-republish sites trying to outrank Wikipedia and GitHub (eg, gitmemory, which was somehow successful in drowning out github in results), the obviously-computer-generated/assisted comparison and list sites that have no real original content. Filtering these out from results would not be that hard, and it is perhaps more surprising that Google and DDG fail so strikingly at doing so. Even where kagi fails by default, it allows you to deprioritize and block sites and types of sites, a feature that Google oddly lacks (and used to have, if I recall).
Kagi's argument, I think, is that this type of customization, and removal of low-quality views-and-advertising-supported sites, is fundamentally incompatible with the advertising-based business models of Google and DDG. And in a way, that they seem to be reasonably successful at being better while not using their own index perhaps gives evidence against a particular worry, which is that they're actually just doing better because those sorts of sites are targeting Google and Bing (and thus DDG), and if Kagi were to become large enough, they would fall victim to the same attacks.
-
Comment on UK in turmoil as government's gamble to solve economic woes fuels crisis, instead in ~finance
pallas (edited )Link ParentIt's astounding. Everyone I've talked to has formed an opinion that Truss' government is terrible. It's surprisingly consistent. I've heard socialists on the continent joke about her. I've heard...- Exemplary
It's astounding. Everyone I've talked to has formed an opinion that Truss' government is terrible. It's surprisingly consistent. I've heard socialists on the continent joke about her. I've heard appalled hard Tories, even those who usually find political conversation impolite, bring up what a disaster she is, unasked. No one even feels it necessary to convince anyone that the government is terrible: they just assume anyone paying any attention to politics agrees. And they do. It's amazingly unifying.
It just seems like Truss' government is piecing together policy choices in a completely incoherent way, with no real attempt at ideological justification, unwilling to sacrifice anything except a connection to reality. Whether you agree or disagree with the politics of a government usually involves whether you agree with their project, their values, and the tradeoffs they make. Nationalize the corporations, seize the assets of the exploitative bourgeoisie, wave the red flag. Lower taxes on the rich, let the lazy poor exploiting social services choose to work harder or starve, create your free market utopia. Even choose to make sacrifices on trade and material comforts in order to preserve a sense of sovereignty and national identity in a world of hegemonic liberal multicultural internationalism. These involve tradeoffs that are not immediately ridiculous, and make some sense as a whole even if you think they are immoral, or won't actually work.
But if you lower taxes on the rich and don't raise it on the poor or cut services, and if you want to simultaneously ensure affordable gas for everyone and enormous energy company profits for shareholders and a strong currency and low inflation... almost anyone, with any political views, can look at that collection of policies and agree that it's delusional.
-
Comment on Requesting resources for de-googling in ~tech
pallas LinkFor search: as someone who is using Kagi and paying for it, I've been quite impressed. Using DuckDuckGo, I feel like there's a definite sense that one is sacrificing search quality in exchange for...For search: as someone who is using Kagi and paying for it, I've been quite impressed. Using DuckDuckGo, I feel like there's a definite sense that one is sacrificing search quality in exchange for not supporting Google. Kagi feels like it actually offers a better search that Google, especially in the ability to tweak the algorithm and rankings.
With that said, their costs seem quite surprising to me, and make me question how sustainable their service actually is: if I'm interpreting those numbers correctly, even at $10 a month, they would appear to be losing money, just in terms of pure computing cost, for a user making 1,000 searches a month, or around 40 searches a day.
Maybe there is a considerable difference in the way security and safety is handled on public transport in the US and Europe, and perhaps the way public safety is handled more generally. In my experiences regularly taking public transport in a few major European cities, there are very often security guards or police on trains or in stations, especially in more affluent cities. They will intervene, and do seem to be there for public safety (eg, they are often completely separate from the people checking for fare evasion). Similarly, public parks will often have police there, and there will often simply be police around the streets. But there is certainly a concern for providing direct protection, to the extent that budget allows, for public transport passengers. And as a result, I do generally feel rather safe.
Thinking about it, though, the only direct recollection I have of police and public transport in Los Angeles, where I also regularly took public transport until it seemed to get worse after the pandemic, was a pair of sketchy LASD deputies (during Villaneuva's tenure, during which it was essentially a gang in open legal conflict with the county, in addition, of course, to having literal gangs of its deputies) harassing some passengers, seemingly with vague drug accusations; having the LASD on the train certainly made me feel less safe.