karmiclychee

Now do puhs

It’s like a weaponized grade of whatever they made CSS in JS out of

On Castle, no less.

Oof, I felt this

As a manager, agreed

Seconded. I’m a dude in my mid 30s and I love those movies

Fellow Vue enjoyer! I love Vue, it’s so friendly. Maintaining a complex React app feels like getting dragged behind a truck down a one way road.

(Did you like my two way data binding joke there?)

It’s good branding. “China,” as we think of it, fragmented into states that recombinated into different versions of what they each claimed to be the rightful empire, many, many times. It’s like a ship of thesius thought experiment, almost, but sometimes the boat is a pile of wood, sometimes it’s a galleon, other times it’s a fleet of smaller boats.

And sometimes it’s Turkish. (Sorta)

Source: degree in Song Dynasty era Chinese history. (It’s a long story)

Plus a classic transformation into a found family narrative, mind you. That part is fun, if found families are your thing.

I’ve always felt it doesn’t solve the problem people think it’s solving.

That’s a whole can of worms

Given the psychological effect of owning a gun, or having access to one has on a person, I honestly feel like we’re in the same mental health territory as any behavioral antagonist, like leaving an addictive substance around an addict. You take a gun and put everything it means in a person’s hands - the power, the mythology, the kind of baggage it comes with in this country - and it’s gonna have some kind of effect.

I don’t know about you, but I’ve witnessed, and am aware of many cases where drivers of certain kinds of cars - big, fast, whatever - do stupid, reckless, dangerous, even murderous things because of the feeling of power and control their vehicle gives them. It’s the psychology of the damn things that makes people crazy.

We have a phrase for it, oddly enough: “it’s like leaving a loaded gun on the table”

Ugh, there’s that doom ulcer again

They could just pay their fucking taxes so we can have trains

I call this my “rule of three” - I wait until I’ve seen “something” three times before deciding on an abstraction. Two isn’t enough to get an idea of all the potential angles, and if you don’t touch it a third time, it’s probably not important enough to warrant the effort and risk of a refactor

Easy! Run it on fusion!

I kind of lose the comparison to the same psychological manhole you get from pure numbers. I wonder if the effect would have been improved by starting with some arbitrarily sized pile of rice for bezos money and then trying to divide it downwards (to where you’re scraping the side of a single grain with an exacto for some dust, or looking through a microscope)

Kind of like a “and then there’s you” effect

proportional

Maybe they just don’t have the actual numbers you’d expect from their outsized presence in the discourse, when they’re not being protected, or facilitated, or actively promoted by engagement algorithms or the individuals who own the other platforms.

(I’m pretty sure this is the case, but I’m too lazy to get sources just this minute)