If you ask me, the risk is that the actual socialists will appear unwilling to make the necessary changes because the Democrat establishment won't back it. It will make even genuinely socialist politicians look complicit. They may have to break out as a third party to get shit done.

I don't know where you saw this "No", but all of their code has been up on their (self hosted) GitLab for years: https://git.jami.net/savoirfairelinux

I had no idea this was a thing! I just ordered one now. Thank you!

I believe the quote is:

"No one will ever need more than 640KB of RAM". – Bill Gates

They're working with war criminals and genociders. The poppy is a symbol of remembrance of the horrors of war... and why we must not repeat them.

Surely there were alternatives, just not popular ones. The Greens and NDP generally run a full slate.

If you routinely vote for the least shitty of two parties, you always get shittier and shittier parties.

It was really hard to read without the formatting, so I've fixed it below:

One thing Star Trek could never do today is introduce one of its main characters as an unrepentant anticolonial terrorist, and then spend seven seasons stubbornly refusing to make her apologize for having been one.

Major Kira Nerys grows enormously over Deep Space Nine. She learns that individual Cardassians aren't interchangeable. She befriends some of them. She confronts things the Bajoran Resistance did that were ugly. So the show gives her every opportunity to arrive at the comfortable conclusion you'd expect. She never does.

In Season 5, a Cardassian civilian confronts Kira about a Resistance bombing that killed twelve Cardassians, including the family of the military officer who lived there. He asks whether she feels guilty, and Kira's answer is astonishing from a modern perspective:

"None of you belonged on Bajor. It wasn't your world. For fifty years you raped our planet, and you killed our people. I don't care whether you held a phaser in your hand or you ironed shirts for a living. You were all guilty, and you were all legitimate targets!"

Kira isn't some villain whose radicalism exists so Captain Sisko can spend the next five minutes explaining the enlightened Federation position. She's not an extremist who eventually realizes that both sides went too far. She's not even a former terrorist who has matured enough to be embarrassed by her younger self.

She is the first officer of Deep Space Nine. She may be a complicated hero, but she is objectively a hero. Over the course of the series, Kira changes her understanding of people without ever fundamentally changing her understanding of power. She accepts that an innocent Cardassian doesn't deserve to die solely because he's Cardassian. But the Cardassian occupation of Bajor was maintained by an entire colonial society, not merely the soldiers holding rifles – and Kira still believes the Bajorans had the right to make that occupation unbearable.

That's an incredibly uncomfortable distinction, and DS9 lets it remain uncomfortable. Which is probably why Kira feels like a character from another political universe now.

After 9/11, American television certainly didn't stop making complicated or even sympathetic terrorist characters. But the terrorist became a problem to explain: How was this person radicalized? Can they be redeemed? Have they renounced violence? Are they secretly still dangerous?

What they don't do is show terrorist characters saying "yes I did it, and I'd do it again" while remaining the hero.

Nana Visitor herself noticed the difference years later. Talking about whether Kira could exist after 9/11, she said she couldn't imagine playing her quite the same way. Other shows could have complicated terrorist characters, she observed, but the audience was always being asked to question them. "Kira, never."

And that's the genuinely subversive thing about her. DS9 doesn't ask us to discover that Kira was secretly right about everything she did. It shows us innocent people harmed by the Resistance. It lets victims call her a murderer. It lets Kira herself recognize moral boundaries she didn't always recognize before. But it never requires the colonized person to condemn her own resistance before we're allowed to consider her a hero.

By the end of the series, Star Trek does something even stranger: when Cardassia itself falls under Dominion occupation, the former Bajoran terrorist is sent to teach the Cardassians how to become terrorists. The imperial power that once hunted Kira's resistance suddenly needs exactly the knowledge her resistance produced.

Eventually the people who called her a terrorist needed her to teach them how to resist an occupation. Turns out terrorism looks a lot different when you're the one being occupied.

orignal source: Facebook

All of them wearing poppies without a hint of irony.

Fuckers.

He's a Liberal. People just keep electing them for some reason.

I was dubious. "What could this possibly do" I thought, "that yt-dlp can't?".

I pointed it at a video on Substack that I've been wanting to watch offline (that platform is just shite) and after a little getting tripped up by the UI... boom. 1hr of video just in my Downloads/ folder.

Thanks. This is pretty great.

Oh yeah, totally my bad. I hadn't realised that there were three people in this thread! I'm not intoxicated, though I am quite tired. I'm signing off on this whole thread now.

Here's you:

Your entire tone comes across pretentious, presumptuous and hostile. I’m glad most of the country doesn’t think or act like you.

Also you:

At what fucking point did a comment about her husband diminish one iota of her success? Is that a risk in your world, and all it says about your respect for women?

Holy fuck.

You might want to re-evaluate just who's being hostile here. I'll own the pretentious label though. I'm not trying to come off that way, but I've been told that my writing can sometimes read like that.

I have been to funerals for women, funerals where they highlight at the funeral the accomplishments of the woman's dead husband. This sort of sexism is far more common than you appear to believe. The fact that you jumped to the accomplishments of Chow's long-dead husband in the face of her monumental current achievements is, whether you want to acknowledge it or not, sexism. Had you diminished her achievements and compared them to Layton's that'd be sexist too — worse really — but that doesn't make your initial comment any better.

I get it, nobody likes it when people point out something you've done as shitty. It's especially bad when you don't think the label fits because you don't recognise what you've said as terrible, and the intent wasn't there. But that's how this stuff works, it's why sexism is systemic rather than explicit. It's the water we're swimming in and it's often not easy to recognise.

I get that you weren't trying to be shitty here, but you said a shitty thing. Maybe you don't see it yet, but I'm hoping that this will at least start you on the path to getting you there some day.