![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/pictrs/image/2b46c336-6153-495c-ae45-d449bfcad37e.png)
Well building bombs on the other hand is very lucrative. As long as you keep a few zones of earth as playgrounds for these bombs
Well building bombs on the other hand is very lucrative. As long as you keep a few zones of earth as playgrounds for these bombs
I guess it’s also my bad. After reading the text with a more neutral mindset it’s not that clear cut as I initially read it. My bs detector tends to get a bit sensitive when AI comes up and I interpreted the wording in the worst way possible.
You know what I never had a picture of a silly goose in my head. But now I do. Thanks!
Well I hope she’s afraid of them now.
If that was a real card I would have hated the font of that 23 so hard
I’m gonna start following and bothering you!
Edit: huh boost for lemmy doesn’t seem to have a “follow this user” button. So you might be save for now.
As the first AI-based mutation testing tool, Mutahunter surpasses traditional “dumb” AST-based methods. Our AI-driven approach provides a full contextual understanding of the entire codebase,
This is where I call bullshit. The AST is a precise representation of the code which should be easier to analyse and modify instead of the raw text. If you only rely on processing the text I have a hard time believing your AI has a deep understanding of the contextual interdependencies of the different parts of the code.
Edit: it kinda does use the AST if one of the preconditions is a treesitter grammar? Maybe the marketing wording is just very unfortunate?
No that’s not the same. In one case there is only the theoretical possibility of help whereas in the other case there is a realizable possibility for help. This is a big difference.
On average it gets hotter by 2.5 degrees or less now.
Yes on average over a multiple decade period. This says nothing about how weather is going to change and it’s likely to change a lot. Extreme weathers are going to be way more likely anywhere you are.
Stupidity shouldn’t result in death. And not following the law also shouldn’t result in death as long as lives aren’t actively endangered.
Aside from that, chasing the guy over a broken light was pretty dumb of the cop. Noncooperative vehicles are a BIG hazard to other traffic. Write down the number plate, visit them at home. The taillight will still be broken tomorrow.
I mean even if you aren’t old now you’ll be old eventually. And then the heat’s gon’ get you
But if a private company does it, it belongs ti the private company.
Unless you don’t believe in private ownership?
“If I invented the means of saving lives that doesn’t make it my responsibility to actually do so. Especially if there are profits on the line”. Wow.
Germany has a beautiful sentence in its constitution:
Eigentum verpflichtet. Sein Gebrauch soll zugleich dem Wohle der Allgemeinheit dienen.
Property implies responsibility. Its use shall also benefit the wellbeing of the general public.
The thought being that while private property is a core staple of our society this is only the case because the concept of private property is seen as beneficial overall. If private property starts hurting the general public then the implied responsibilities coming with the property are not being fulfilled and the concept loses its value to society as a whole.
I really don’t get what you’re trying to say here. That’s obviously great. I am all for doing this stuff, how could you even think I wouldn’t? I’m saying both kinds of activism provide value.
(Aside from the fact that nothing really got damaged…)
Part of your anger seems to stem from me saying that this whole thing isn’t moving forward fast enough and somehow you think that’s a critique of your personal work. I assure you that wasn’t my goal. But you have to admit that we are, globally, not moving fast enough.
The connection to the fight for racial equality is interesting but I’m not sure how well this applies. How do you suppose you can do anything equivalently “not accepting the rules we want to protest” in the context of climate change? Because before there was a big movement there were just a few people breaking the unfair rules. Which where likely talked similarly about as you are talking about these activists right now.
I’m only speculating that you made that situation up because deep down you understand the need to disassociate yourself from these protests, and it’s increasingly clear to me that you see their value in some kind of shell game strategy, where no one knows who’s pulling the strings. But again, you made that up, not me.
I am being very clear about the fact that two forms of activism can and should be done under different names. And that that is because some forms of activism that I deem valuable would have detrimental effects on the other form of activism if done under the same name. You seem to have a hard time getting that but that’s not because I’m being unclear about this.
Ich behaupte halt dass das nicht vernünftig ist den Steuerfreibetrag zu erhöhen und dabei zu behaupten das würde ja vor allem Geringverdienern nützen.
Du hast aber nun mal behauptet es bevorteilt vor allem Geringverdienende. Es gibt übrigens mehrere Millionen Menschen die Arbeiten und trotzdem aufstocken müssen. Denen bringt das gar nichts.
Because if you’re not embarassed or ashamed of the pipeline disturbance/damage, then you shouldn’t have a problem openly associating yourself with it. The fact that you’re trying to hard to suggest it’s prudent to distance oneself from a disruption/protest tells me that deep down you understand these things are perceived negatively and are therefore more likely to cause friction and disagreement than sympathy for a cause.
You are still arguing from the perspective that activism needs to please people or else it’s “embarrassing” or “shameful”. I do agree that there is activism that displeases people, I think that is still valuable and nothing to be ashamed of.
But I can acknowledge that there are people that do not see that as something that should be supported. Different forms of activism have different target groups and different wanted effects. It’s just a rational thing to address different target groups and produce different effects under different names.
Ah, so now it’s enough to acknowledge that public resources exist and people can find it if they want? Because seconds ago you were cheering for people to paint rocks in a public place to keep people from talking about anything else. Seems you’re not quite sure what you believe or how you think it should be accomplished. So what is it? Should it be shoved into people’s faces so they can’t ignore it? Or should they be left to find their own resources?
I want the issue front and center in the public discussion. You and I are both aware that people aren’t 100% of the time participating in the public discussion but spend time doing their own thing. Which is partially influenced by what is happening in the public discussion. If climate change is a topic, even if just tangential, that still helps influence people to think about it in the times they spend outside of the public discussion.
I am an ally. That’s what you don’t understand and refuse to entertain as a possibility. I’m an environmental advocate both personally and professionally, and I’ve been working on climate change and environmental issues for over a decade. And even I’m telling you that painting a rock is stupid and counterproductive.
Again I want to thank you for your work, we need people like you. But I don’t think that’s all we need. It has become apparent that just silently working on this at the grassroots level hasn’t shown the necessary progress. So people have decided to express their opinion in more loud and disturbing manners.
The only people who give a shit and empathize with it are people who were already on your team.
Again, this protest isn’t about sympathy. I don’t think anyone is having the illusion that a majority would be happy about this kind of protest. But I think “no one gives a shit” is pretty evidently a lie. People very demonstrably give a shit about Stonehenge being orange for a little while.
Ganz abgesehen davon dass es einige Leute gibt die eben unter dem Freibetrag verdienen denen das gar nicht hilft habe ich ja auch nicht gefragt warum das denen auch hilft. Meine Frage hat sich spezifisch auf das vor allem bezogen. Diese Steuererleichterung ist deutlich vorteilhafter für besser Verdienende und trägt zur weiteren Spreizung der Schere zwischen Arm und Reich bei.
Wenn man vor allem Geringverdienern helfen möchte kann man z.b. an der Umsatzsteuer für Gegenstände des täglichen Bedarfs drehen. Essen, Hygienemittel, Schulmaterial, sowas.
Die Steuersenkung der FDP war bisher ein höherer steuerfrei Betrag… Was vorallem den Geringverdienern hilft.
Geringverdienern wird der minimale Steuersatz erlassen, wenn sie denn überhaupt über dem Freibetrag liegen. Leute die den maximalen Steuersatz zahlen wird dafür dieser erlassen, prozentual also deutlich mehr. Wie genau hilft der Steuerfreibetrag vor allem Geringverdienern?
Yeah they were experimenting with 64bit exploitation when this signal handler got some focus regarding a (likely related) deadlock so they rushed to disclose their findings to the project to minimise the possibility of having eyes on this vulnerability