In article <7c490eda-e041-8cdd-5bcf-5b886a32f65f@example.net>,
D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>On Thu, 18 Apr 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 11:03:26 +0200, D wrote:
>>
>>> Do note that in europe the fashion du jour is to appoint children to
>>> senior political office ...
>>
>> They tend to score higher on measures of democracy than the US does,
>> though.
>
>And lower on freedom.

Depends. If you look at the total percentage of population currently
incarcerated, the US is an order of magnitude higher than any European
country.

On the other hand, the US does have some interesting protections that
most European countries don't have. That's mostly not a problem there,
but situations can be imagined where it might become one.

It really is interesting seeing how much Americans are just plain afraid
of things in ways that Europeans aren't.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:05:31 -0700, Dave Yeo wrote:

> Didn't your declaration of independence start out with all men are
> equal?

Remember, the authors of that were mostly slave owners. By “men” they
meant “white men”. They didn’t mean “nonwhites” and they didn’t mean
“women”.

It was a “democracy” in the original, Athenian sense. Not the way it is
understood in actual democracies these days.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:05:31 -0700, Dave Yeo wrote:
>
>> Didn't your declaration of independence start out with all men are
>> equal?
>
> Remember, the authors of that were mostly slave owners. By “men” they
> meant “white men”. They didn’t mean “nonwhites” and they didn’t mean
> “women”.
>
> It was a “democracy” in the original, Athenian sense. Not the way it is
> understood in actual democracies these days.
>

You mean where slaves had rights, a course to citizenship and could buy
their freedom, as well being protected from violence by the State? Also
not a racial thing.
Dave

On Sat, 20 Apr 2024 16:50:44 -0700, Dave Yeo wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 22:05:31 -0700, Dave Yeo wrote:
>>
>>> Didn't your declaration of independence start out with all men are
>>> equal?
>>
>> Remember, the authors of that were mostly slave owners. By “men” they
>> meant “white men”. They didn’t mean “nonwhites” and they didn’t mean
>> “women”.
>>
>> It was a “democracy” in the original, Athenian sense. Not the way it is
>> understood in actual democracies these days.
>>
> You mean where slaves had rights, a course to citizenship and could buy
> their freedom, as well being protected from violence by the State? Also
> not a racial thing.

OK, the Dumbfuckistani Founding Fathers missed that bit. ;)

On Sat, 20 Apr 2024, Scott Dorsey wrote:

> In article <7c490eda-e041-8cdd-5bcf-5b886a32f65f@example.net>,
> D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 11:03:26 +0200, D wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do note that in europe the fashion du jour is to appoint children to
>>>> senior political office ...
>>>
>>> They tend to score higher on measures of democracy than the US does,
>>> though.
>>
>> And lower on freedom.
>
> Depends. If you look at the total percentage of population currently
> incarcerated, the US is an order of magnitude higher than any European
> country.

Oh how I would wish that europe in general, and sweden in particular, had
more people incarcerated. Shootings and bombings by criminal immigrant
gangs is sky rocketing in sweden and the police has lost control
completely.

> On the other hand, the US does have some interesting protections that
> most European countries don't have. That's mostly not a problem there,
> but situations can be imagined where it might become one.
>
> It really is interesting seeing how much Americans are just plain afraid
> of things in ways that Europeans aren't.

And the reverse I'd say. many europeans have trouble sleeping due to
Donald Trump and americans being allowed to own guns.

> --scott
>
>

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>On Mon, 15 Apr 2024 22:34:53 -0000 (UTC), Ben Collver wrote:
>
>> The discussion moved at a level as if nobody ever had said or written a
>> single word about reusability in the past 50 years.
>
>That’s because most of that 50 years was spent talking about it, not
>actually doing it.

In the eighties, everybody was talking about code reuse and how it would
be the future and how all of our problems would go away.

Not we have people throwing together code that consists entirely of library
calls without actually understanding what those library calls are really doing.

>I think the problem is pretty much solved now. Open Source has become the
>established way to develop most parts of the software stack (except
>perhaps the most specialized bits at the top). And code reuse follows very
>naturally from the ability to share, modify and redistribute other
>people’s code.

There isn't enough modification and redistribution. We need to add two
numbers, so why not just link in this giant math library?
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

with <slrnv1rafb.3l3.bencollver@svadhyaya.localdomain> Ben Collver wrote:

*SKIP* [ 2 lines 1 level deep]
> by Uwe Friedrichsen October 2, 2020

Sure thing, topic should be discussed with whoever started it. Not
going to happen, I guess.

*SKIP* [ 72 lines 1 level deep]

> What happened? It kept me a while thinking. Eventually, I realized
> that I had observed a disease of our whole industry in its purest
> form: We continuously forget what we have learned. We always reinvent
> everything from scratch. My personal observation is that discussions
> in the IT community start over about every 5 years [1]. That is how
> long we remember as a community. After that we need to rediscover your
> insights from scratch.

One thing must be made prominent: People who fancy cons are not
representative sample of The Cheap Laborforce of The Industry. With
this notion I conclude that people who fall in this slot tend to burn
out in five years (for whatever reasons). But that's OK, they are
promptly replaced with new ones.

*CUT* [164 lines 2 levels deep]

--
Torvalds' goal for Linux is very simple: World Domination
Stallman's goal for GNU is even simpler: Freedom