Any executable code is dangerous if isolation assumptions are violated. JavaScript, Python, or anything Turing-complete. It does not matter if the code is native or interpreted.
Distributing any data is dangerous. Programs and devices have been compromised by malicious text, audio, images, video and other kinds of binary media (data), so even (especially?) programs. So I'd argue this - on it's own - is not really a useful thing to remark. The question is the characteristics and interactions of the dangers.
The comment you responded to is weird because of exactly this reason. Very terse without a whole lot of substance, coming off as interaction bait / similar. All too often do I see comments on social media where people post something that will obviously lead others into being cornered arguing something that was misleading in the first place. Best not to entertain these unless confidence can be had that they're being genuine and are phrasing like this by mistake / not knowing better.
Just debate, talk more. You'll get lots of kudos and people agreeing with you. The dummies will stay dumb.
Why do you lack confidence in your positions and feel justified in appealing to power to silence your opposition? Probably because your positions are debatable and that scares you.
Demonstrate your ability to convince everyone with your dazzling philosophy and concrete facts on any topic you choose and see where all that smug superiority gets you.
A strong Internet Bill of Rights (IBOR) would wreck lots of surveillance state tools, shady business models, and the burgeoning censorship industrial complex.
I wonder if undermining terms of service in this way is a stop on the road to IBOR?
It's not a stimulus or sugar rush at all. The effectiveness depends on how much the government is artificially constraining liquidity. If the government is massively intervening with austerity policies, then the effect will be large.
You should think of it more using the transaction cost based approach. Government money is artificially scarce, therefore it has high transaction costs, therefore it hinders trade instead of facilitating it.
The purpose of the scrip is to issue a money that isn't artificially scarce so it's transaction costs are low. In this way you don't get a stimulus, rather you are getting rid of dead weight loss. A guy pulling a rickshaw is naturally going to fall behind someone who can walk without baggage. The point isn't to make the runner faster or stimulate his performance via some sort of doping.
Wot? Not sure how to respond to something so silly. I hope you mistyped. From whence does one derive their "money supply"?
Scrip is a placeholder for value like any other printed currency. It works well in place of debased government fiat, at least in times of trouble, because the web of trust at the local level is strong enough to back individual transactions.
Word choice can help your thinking. We all receive different struggles and decide how to respond.
The way you describe your 'luck', I read as "random good fortune" tinged with some guilt for being a 'have' when there are so many 'have-not's.
I prefer 'blessed', and not in the corny #blessed way, to describe my condition. To me, I was given much because so much is expected of me by God, by universe and by my higher self.
The extent to which I am blessed is a component of my calling to improve the total human condition.
If you lean in to that way of thinking, you obligate yourself and that can be as heavy a burden as you choose to make it. That choice and the freedom to decide how to fulfill that obligation are a part of the blessing.
To naval gaze and feel guilt is natural but fruitless stinkin' thinkin'. Motivating oneself with gratitude and humbling oneself by giving glory are ways to power through guilt.
> I prefer 'blessed', and not in the corny #blessed way, to describe my condition. To me, I was given much because so much is expected of me by God, by universe and by my higher self.
How do you avoid this leading to a feeling that you, and anyone else "blessed", is more important that others? Should we really assume that the condition of one's life is an indicator of both the existence of a higher power and of that person's relative importance to it?
The feeling of being “blessed” is the recognition that a substantial component of your current fortune is due to circumstances outside your control, whether due to a higher power, support from family/friends, raw luck, or the kindness of strangers. The proper and typical response to this feeling is one of gratitude, not self-importance, and the desired response is to contribute in various ways to the blessing of others (i.e. pay it forward).
It’s only when we lose the salience of that “blessed” feeling, and we start to take our circumstances for granted, that leads to our feeling of greater importance than others. It’s a slippery position no doubt, but the alternative feelings are: guilt (that I’ve received unfairly), anxiety (that what I’ve received may not be enough), jealousy (that what I’ve received is not enough), or pride/self-satisfaction (that I’m primarily responsible for what I’ve received). And honestly, it’s pride that is the true gateway to that feeling of self-importance you describe.
What you're describing is better captured by the word "lucky". "Blessed" is lucky plus an acknowledgement that this luck was granted to you on purpose by a higher power, so you deserved it in a karmic way (though not operational way). It really irks me too.
Someone/something divine must do the blessing. This is in the definition of bless, so how do you conclude it doesn't? To gain the favor of a god/goddess means the divine creature believes you deserve it, even if you don't think it to be so.
Christianity explicitly states pride is a sin. They’re not supposed to pray for God’s favour in this life but to be given the strength to be good so they can be allowed salvation in the next life.
I never said you did, I just used it as a counter to what you said: that blessing is about getting favour in this world from a divine being. It helps that it's also the world's largest religion.
In fact, Christianity explicitly glorifies suffering and martyrdom so the Christian God is hardly giving good things to good people...
And none of it was originally written in English. The English words were chosen because of their definitions, so that it made sense. I’m not sure what you mean by this.
In other news, I come from a family of Christian pastors and I’m quite informed on what words mean in the Bible and which ones actually matter. You are mixing several ones into a single word that has a singular definition that is well defined.
> "Blessed" is lucky plus an acknowledgement that this luck was granted to you on purpose by a higher power, so you deserved it in a karmic way
The karmic component would make it a reward. So much as you are blessed with resources, you are then able to make sacrifices that aren't necessarily enviable.
I definitely understand it from the angle you're describing, though similar to a sibling comment I'd see that as "lucky" more than "blessed".
The OP comment was removed ,but if I remember right it was specifically calling out their life circumstances as being given by god specifically, and a view that this is both a purposeful prioritization of that person and a responsibility to use gods blessings.
I wouldn't even argue directly against that view, mainly because I strongly believe that everyone has an absolute right to freedom of religion. I would have been curious to hear more though, because at least how I remember the OP describing it there was more to it than a recognition of the circumstances they were born into and how it compares to others less fortunate.
I am an average, flawed and vulnerable human. I am aware everything I value and love including my life can be taken from me.
Should that happen, I don't consider that a special punishment from God any more than my current condition is a special gift.
I'm here for a blink and then I am gone for the rest of long time. This brief opportunity to improve things and make earthly living less hellish for those who come after me is the blessing that I am thankful for.
So these patchers are monkey patching a system executable needed to have a bootable/usable system?
Why is this allowed? This sounds like a small hell.
I left Windows the moment we shifted from "developers, developers, developers, developers" to "advertisers, advertisers, advertisers, advertisers" and never looked back.
To juice their ESG rating to maintain their bond rating, I imagine. Same reason Gilette and Nike and every other megabrand suicided over the past 5 years. All to keep getting the speculation fiat buckerinos.
A gist, the digital equivalent of scribblings on a stained cocktail napkin, lays bare the great mystery. The great dragon is slain! His precious treasure is of no value whatsoever.
Fellow scrounging raccoons, raise your chipped mugs and cracked cups! Let us toast to our fortune, we truly are the blessed ones.
