I think the commenter brings up an interesting point that China more effectively regulates industries that commit wrong [1]. I wouldn't reduce their point to being tantamount to fascism; rather, I read @gsatic as arguing for equal application of the law. This seems fundamental to the US constitution vis à vis John Locke: people (corporations in this case) cede rights for security. If we give corporations regulatory fines that pale in comparison to revenue as a result of malfeasance, are we allowing companies to enjoy our society's benefits, without having to sacrifice the same rights others do?
[1] - Of course, this isn't the complete picture: China has a penchant for arbitrarily dealing a heavy hand to law-abiding companies/persons.
Because it's CNN and they like to make headlines with some bogus whistleblower that is concerned that some die-hard trumpers are going to hack top companies and create some kind of mass hysteria. Just the usual fear mongering in the news media to get views.
It is also true that people who rob businesses are harmful to society. That is completely independent of the terrible outcomes caused by private vigilanteism.
I see, but I don't find a problem with that either though.
Seems no different than crime stoppers, it's usually just a reward for information leading to an arrest, it's not an actual bounty. It's not excluding that, but he's most likely hoping someone who knows the person who stole it will rat for the money.
And I think you'll have to provide examples of the "terrible outcomes caused by private vigilanteism".
> "friendly people" but also "hateful racist trumpers"? Well which is it?
Another native Carolinian chiming in here (from NC, but similar).
These people are friendly if you "pass" as one of them. Be white, wear a trucker cap, don't dress up too fancy, use a southern accent (or at least, don't talk too pretty), don't be gay, don't say a damn thing about politics or religion. Don't drive a Prius or something. You're good to go. If you are careful enough they might even occasionally start confiding in you, and expect you to agree with them, about their casually racist views. If you reach this point, you can get by with just not saying anything, and the conversation will usually evolve to other less difficult matters.
You can violate these rules, of course, but you need to be able to "pass" by compensating in other ways. So if you do wear a suit and drive a Tesla, you could make up for it if you have a good southern accent or go to church or proudly espouse your conservative values in some other way (carry a sidearm, maybe).
Also, my people will sometimes act nice to you even if they hate you. If you're here a while you will learn to recognize it. Southern "hospitality" is incredibly superficial - there's a thin veneer. If you don't look too closely, and you don't care too much about what they really think of you (because really, they're mostly harmless - unless you need something from them), you will be OK.
... unless you have kids. Please don't send kids to public schools in the rural white south if you or they are even vaguely progressive.
Imagine if a racist republican texan moved into your neighbourhood because his choices of policies resulted in the decline of his neighbourhood. And he keeps voting for those same policies. Wouldn't you be reserved or even hostile to that person?
You do have similar folks in rural Oregon or rural Idaho too . Have you been to Klamath Falls, OR ? If you do have to compare you would probably make a direct comparison to say Athens, GA or Research Triangle, NC . IMO this country already has a huge divide between rural and urban populations no matter which state you are in. Educated college towns are the hidden gems for anyone looking to escape 1m dollar Bay Area houses.
OP's rules of thumb are pretty broadly applicable in a great many rural, small-town regions of the USA. If you're politically progressive, you can still pass as a local and blend in if you adopt a few mannerisms and if you're willing to ignore/dodge a lot of questionable conversation material. The only thing you can't really fake is your skin color.
From my point of view you just described the left.
Dressing in a suit and tie is not a rarity in the south or rural areas. Being gay isn't some attribute that qualifies for special treatment just because of your sexual preference. Politics also isn't some defining feature, and is WAY too publicized in today's culture. Why does it matter what someone's political view points are? Does that make them less than you, and are they really racist or is it because you don't agree? Because conservatives think democrats are racist for implying POCs aren't capable of doing things themselves. Maybe southern hospitality is superficial in some southerners but at least its some kind of hospitality, have you been to any major city? They'll let you bleed out before calling for help.
On the one hand, everybody commenting on this post is touting their newly adopted off-the-beaten-path rural-ish community. On the other hand, everyone who lives there is basically a closet racist and homophobe. Which is it?
If you actually want a more conservative culture - as, I'm sure, many of the HN crowd who intend to flee the Bay Area do - these communities will be especially appealing. One person's negative is another's positive.
I really do want to emphasize how polite rural people can be to your face while shit talking you behind your back, though. The idyllic and friendly "country folk" lifestyle is really bullshit. I grew up in such a community and we would smile and "yes sir" all day long to people's faces then talk total trash about them the second they walk away.
If you don't look too close and you don't care to make friends with them, you won't notice. Some fancy city liberal who moves in and minds their own business is unlikely to have any direct conflict, while still eliciting a massive amount of gossip and vitriol "under the hood."
An introverted HN programmer, working from home and staying out of the way, may only ever notice the good. But if you really want to be "part of" a community like this - as in, having real friends there - you will see a different side of things.
I mean, by large most people in most places in USA are friendly/neutral, since most of the people in SC are conservative, the brand of hate you get from the crazies is of the trump/maga/racist flavor. Where as in liberal areas, you'd probably get a different sort of hate.
Live in Minnesota. Plenty of liberals, but 'friendly' Minnesotans are not. I vacation every year on Hilton Head in South Carolina--although, with many transplants and vacationers from what I assume are wealthy liberal areas, it's not anywhere near a haven for political cultists. That said, the people are GENUINELY more friendly and will strike up active conversation, want to hang out again, etc; whereas, in Minnesota, it's incredibly difficult to talk with someone more than about the weather.
If you deep dive into bun, it only has the gained performance for certain features and cant really even be compared to deno or node at the moment because it lacks so many other features that would better showcase its speed.
I had a huge jolt away from the Bun hype-euphoria when I noticed it won't run Express.
That level of incompatibility is the banner headline not some minor footnote, which is effectively how the bun team decided to communicate that little detail.
If they're going to do things all-over-again...again in the
JS community couldn't they get it right this time and go with speed, stability, compatibility...
Hm, that claims SQLite is 'never' used for web backends; Bun says it's motivated for use 'at the edge' - first thing I thought of when I read that was Fly.io/Litestream: https://fly.io/blog/all-in-on-sqlite-litestream/
(No idea if there's any relationship between the projects, just makes me think that article's a bit dismissive.)
Think conservative values on a social scale minus the personal property part(don't know if the personal property is a general consensus or just authoritarian laws.) Drugs are forbidden, fathers rule the household, children are disciplined when they don't meet satisfaction, you're expected to work hard. You know all the things the conservatives get a bad rap for in the US but everyone thinks that way there and uses it in collectivism
If you read his comment a little further you'll see his point... "You cannot understand how significant such a change is to the people of the country unless you've lived in a third world country and really seen what it's like"... to spell it out for you, he's saying no one from the once third world cares what Gibson thinks of Singapore because if you haven't lived 3rd world you don't understand the greatness that comes from Singapore now. Although I don't agree with the draconian measures taken, I can support that they're happier now than before, something most people from first world countries fail to see, because you have no idea what it's like living in a third world.
But I don't think the criticism was ever about economic development, or hell, even general happiness in Singapore.
Gibson even said "Singapore's destiny will be to become nothing more than a smug, neo-Swiss enclave of order and prosperity, amid a sea of unthinkable... weirdness."
It was a commentary on culture and human behavior, an orthogonal topic.
He wasn't suggesting Singapore sacrifice economics for culture, or as far as I can tell, making any suggestion at all.
It is weird that so many people conflate the topics, as if art, history, and as Gibson would put it "weirdness" are inherently in conflict with material prosperity.
Losing a wing is disastrous regardless of altitude, there is no gliding with just one wing. Even at a few feet losing a wing would roll the plane instantly and you'd crash in the water inverted at 180mph.
Well let's put it this way - if you lose a wing at any altitude, you are screwed. But if you "only" have forward velocity as a problem, then you might just get lucky based on orientation or some other thing which absorbs some energy. If you're high altitude and lose that wing, there are probably fewer freak lucky things which can prevent you from pancaking into the earth.
One example of the latter is the many crashes of speedboats. They certainly can be fatal crashes, but sometimes things go unexpectedly well for the driver.
Can we just skip the inefficient electric market phase all together? It's not gonna last and its not any cleaner than fossil fuels so stop kidding yourselves... The military already uses nuclear power for their ships why not the cargo ships?
is a nuclear powered ship really that much more efficient? The aircraft carrier design goals isn't to make a lightweight, large carry capacity vehicle with low maintenance costs, so i don't see why those designs would fulfill a commercial shipping need.
Every one of these "new electric plane" companies never have an actual product. It's always "we're working on the design and hopefully test our prototype next year." The possibilities?.. "12 passengers a total of 180 miles"... haha so economically to have 10 planes do what 1 can do in half the time. And really more than 10 planes if you factor in charging time to get that 180 mile range.
