Skip Navigation
InitialsDiceBear„Initials” ( by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (
Posts 4
Comments 323
'Zionist-free zone': Israelis are increasingly unwanted at global tourism sites
  • No I didn't mix it up, I included the Amish, could have included Romani, and specified that I was talking about geographically dispersed ethnicities in general.

    Yes, some Jewish people have ties to what is Israel today, and no it really doesn't open a can of worms. I was very clear that displacing any group of people is wrong: Hence, the state of Israel should never have been created, but now that it exists, we need to figure out a solution that doesn't involve displacing any more people.

    To answer the "how far back" etc: Quite simply put, everyone today (sans a couple hundred thousand stateless Palestinian refugees, and a few others) have some citizenship and live on some land. Nobody has the right to displace others to claim that they have "more" of a right to that land. Thus: If you have ties to some land, and someone else lives there, you're shit outta luck unless they want to negotiate with you. If, like the Kurds, your living in the place you have ties to, but don't have your own state, you have a decent case.

    It really isn't that complicated: Don't displace/murder people. Two wrongs don't make a right.

  • 'Zionist-free zone': Israelis are increasingly unwanted at global tourism sites
  • Exactly: I am antizionist because Jews getting a place of their own implicitly means that some other group, which currently has that place, must be displaced.

    Saying that Jews should have a place of their own is not comparable to saying that Italians should have a place of their own, because being Italian is tied to having hereditary ties to the place that is Italy, whereas being a Jew has no tie to a specific piece of land. It is rather comparable to saying that Christians, Muslims, the Amish, or some other group of people that are dispersed and unified by beliefs not tied to a place should have their own place, and that if such a place does not exist it is legitimate to displace others to establish it.

    I firmly believe that Israel should never have been created. As do many Jews (often ultra orthodox ones). However, I recognise the reality on the ground, that the state now exists and that many of those that moved there have now lived there for up to several generations. I do not believe that two wrongs make a right, and as such, I'm not a proponent of dissolving the state of Israel and displacing the Jews that now live there to make room for those displaced following 1948. However, I do believe that the displaced Palestinians should be allowed to return and have equal rights within the now existing state of Israel.

  • 'Zionist-free zone': Israelis are increasingly unwanted at global tourism sites
  • It honestly feels like we somehow have to take back the (very loaded) word "antisemitism", as Israel and its supporters seem intent on making it mean "anything the Israeli government disagrees with".

    I'm not an antisemite, and have no hate whatsoever for anyone because of theirs religious beliefs or where they come from. My views are antizionist and antigenocide. Which are strictly political views, not tied to any specific demographic of people.

  • Switzerland mandates all software developed for the government be open sourced
  • The issue with online voting, no matter what you do, is that someone can force you under threat of violence to vote for a specific candidate, and watch to make sure you do it. Complete privacy in the voting booth is paramount to ensuring that everyone can vote freely.

  • You're going to have to find out for yourself, if you're so curious.
  • Very dense, yes, but stuff can be very dense and have low viscosity at the same time. Lava has a viscosity similar to peanut butter is what I've heard. You can push stuff down into it, it just requires some force to prevent the stuff from floating back to the top.

    You could in principle walk on lava, either by moving quickly enough that you stay on top, or by protecting your legs enough that you could sink in maybe around knee deep where you would float.

  • Musk Donates to Trump, Tapping Vast Fortune to Swing 2024 Race
  • I'll be completely honest: I was on board the hype train. I thought it was awesome that someone was investing in EV's and pushing them into the market. Hell, I was even fooled by the whole hyperloop thing...

    I'm glad it's not too late to admit that I was terribly wrong about the guy.

    At the same time, I don't blame those that were fooled back then, and I most definitely don't blame anyone for having bought a Tesla and keeping it even though the guy turned out to be who he is. Some years ago he honestly looked like he was trying to do a lot of good, at least for those of us that didn't look very closely.

  • 5 years of experience, yet still not clue what "Underfull \hbox" means
  • I see a lot of strange takes around here, and honestly cannot understand where you are coming from. Like really: I've written several 100+ page documents with everything from basic tables, figures and equations, to various custom-formatted environments and programmatically generated sections, and I've never encountered even a third of these formatting issues people are talking about.

    You literally just \documentclass[whatever]{my doc type}, \usepackage{stuff} and fire away. To be honest, I've seen some absolutely horrifying preambles and unnecessary style sheets, and feel the need to ask: How are you people making latex so hard?

  • Mildred
  • Honest question: Are there no limits in the US to what you can legally name your child? Where I'm from a name can be rejected if it can "cause significant harm or inconvenience to the child". This prevents idiots from naming their child "Traitor" or "Terrorist".

  • FOSS programmers, what do you think of horrible people using your software?
  • Software is a tool. I develop stuff that i know is of interest to companies working with everything from nuclear energy to hydrogen electrolysis and CO2 storage. I honestly believe I can make a positive contribution to the world by releasing that software under a permissive licence such that companies can freely integrate it into their proprietary production code.

    I'm also very aware that the exact same software is of interest to the petroleum industry and weapons manufacturers, and that I enable them by releasing it under a permissive licence.

    The way I see it, withholding a tool that can help do a lot of good because it can also be used for bad things just doesn't make much sense. If everybody thinks that way, how can we have positive progress? I don't think I can think of any more or less fundamental technology that can't be used for both. The same chemical process that has saved millions from starvation by introducing synthetic fertiliser has taken millions of lives by creating more and better explosives. If you ask those that were bombed, they would probably say they wish it was never invented, while if you ask those that were saved from the brink of starvation they likely praise the heavens for the technology. Today, that same chemical process is a promising candidate for developing zero-emission shipping.

    I guess my point is this: For any sufficiently fundamental technology, it is impossible to foresee the uses it may have in the future. Withholding it because it may cause bad stuff is just holding technological development back, lively preventing just as much good as bad. I choose to focus on the positive impact my work can have.

  • So is Israel just going to completely overtake Palestine?
  • You are aware that what Israel is doing in Gaza is comparable to the nazi treatment of e.g. the Warsaw ghettos.... right?

    Take a step back, and look at the Israeli soldiers mocking Palestinian dead, mistreating the wounded and captured, and shooting at clearly unarmed civilians for fun. All this while they brag about it on video. Look at that and tell me that it doesn't give you a sick feeling to your stomach of the type you haven't had since you saw photos of concentration camps.

    There are dozens of children that have literally STARVED TO DEATH in Gaza because of Israel's actions. They're dying the same deaths that Jews were put through in concentration camps. Don't you see the horrifying irony in this?

    Israel is at a point where humanitarian workers from recognised international organisations have been targeted and killed, and they brush it off as a "mistake".

    I cannot think about anything in the past 70 years that compares to what Israel is doing, and I hope beyond hope that some force will smite their government and armed forces such that the slaughter will stop. Because it is a slaughter. It's not a war when Israel is counting its dead on its fingers, while there are enough missing Palestinians in the rubble to fill a football stadium. It's just Israel wilfully bombing, burning and slaughtering, with nobody stopping them.

    All this, and you have the fucking audacity to talk about antisemitism? Take a look at the world, and ask yourself how calling for an end to this can have anything to do with the religious beliefs of the perpetrators.

  • So is Israel just going to completely overtake Palestine?
  • Israel recognised Palestinian civilian and security control of the West bank in the Oslo accords from the 90's. They are blatantly shitting on their own promises whenever a genocidic occupier or their enabling security forces set foot on the West Bank without express permission from the Palestinian West Bank government.

  • I feel betrayed...
  • There's evidence that knights would dismount before battle to prevent their horse from being injured, even though they knew they were exposing themselves to greater risk. Although we have more technical knowledge about how to "optimally" care for horses now, there's no reason to believe that we aren't as or more exploitative of them, rendering them as or less healthy than horses back then.

  • HE DOESN’T EVEN SHOOT! Review of a Captured Russian Tank Used in Assaults
  • Just knowing that these don't shoot may be a huge advantage to infantry that are being advanced on by them, as it will probably make them far less hesitant to pop up and take the top of it with small arms fire. Seeing as they're using it as a taxi with the infantry on top, a large volume of small arms fire is likely devastating to it: those metal sheets don't look capable of stopping much, but seem to be intended primarily to make drones explode further away from the tank.

  • With GPL, you're programming Freedom. With MIT, you're programming for free.
  • You are almost on point here, but seem to be missing the primary point of my work. I work as a researcher at a university, doing more-or-less fundamental research on topics that are relevant to industry.

    As I wrote: We develop our libraries for in-house use, and release the to the public because we know that they are valuable to the industry. If what I do is to be considered "industry subsidies", then all of higher education is industry subsidies. (You could make the argument that spending taxpayer money to educate skilled workers is effectively subsidising industry).

    We respond to issues that are related either to bugs that we need to fix for our own use, or features that we ourselves want. We don't spend time implementing features others want unless they give us funding for some project that we need to implement it for.

    In short: I don't work for industry, I work in research and education, and the libraries my group develops happen to be of interest to the industry. Most of my co-workers do not publish their code anywhere, because they aren't interested in spending the time required to turn hacky academic code into a usable library. I do, because I've noticed how much time it saves me and my team in the long run to have production-quality libraries that we can build on.

  • With GPL, you're programming Freedom. With MIT, you're programming for free.
  • You're not seeing the whole picture: I'm paid by the government to do research, and in doing that research my group develops several libraries that can benefit not only other research groups, but also industry. We license these libraries under MIT, because otherwise industry would be far more hesitant to integrate our libraries with their proprietary production code.

    I'm also an idealist of sorts. The way I see it, I'm developing publicly funded code that can be used by anyone, no strings attached, to boost productivity and make the world a better place. The fact that this gives us publicity and incentivises the industry to collaborate with us is just a plus. Calling it a self-imposed unpaid internship, when I'm literally hired full time to develop this and just happen to have the freedom to be able to give it out for free, is missing the mark.

    Also, we develop these libraries primarily for our own in-house use, and see the adoption of the libraries by others as a great way to uncover flaws and improve robustness. Others creating closed-source derivatives does not harm us or anyone else in any way as far as I can see.

  • With GPL, you're programming Freedom. With MIT, you're programming for free.
  • I do exactly this: Write code/frameworks that are used in academic research, which is useful to industry. Once we publish an article, we publish our models open-source under the MIT license. That is because companies that want to use it can then embed our models into their proprietary software, with essentially no strings attached. This gives them an incentive to support our research in terms of collaborative projects, because they see that our research results in stuff they can use.

    If we had used the GPL, our main collaborators would probably not have been interested.

  • The Excel superstars throw down in Vegas
  • Oh, I definitely get that the major appeal of excel is a close to non-existent barrier to entry. I mean, an elementary school kid can learn the basics(1) of using excel within a day. And yes, there are definitely programs out there that have excel as their only interface :/ I was really referring to the case where you have the option to do something "from scratch", i.e. not relying on previously developed programs in the excel sheet.

    (1) I'm aware that you can do complex stuff in excel, the point is that the barrier to entry is ridiculously low, which is a compliment.

  • The Excel superstars throw down in Vegas
  • I just cannot imagine any task you can do in excel that isn't easier to do with Python/Pandas. The simplest manipulations of an excel sheet pretty much require you to chain an ungodly list of arcane commands that are completely unreadable, and god forbid you need to work with data from several workbooks at the same time...

  • I lys av valget: Hvem er alle disse menneskene?

    Jeg skal ikke dømme noen for det de stemmer, spesielt i et lokalvalg hvor jeg vet at partiene lokalt ikke nødvendigvis er representative for partiene nasjonalt. Men det noe som oppriktig forundrer meg når jeg ser valgresultatet: I noen kommuner er det over 40 % av velgerne som stemmer på FRP. Jeg lurer veldig på hva det er som trekker så mange velgere til FRP i de kommunene? Hvilke saker er det? Det er stort sett kommuner som ikke ser så mye til innvandring, lavere skatt er en sak Høyre også pleier å trekke velgere på, og utbygging av vei / bilpolitikk pleier SP å trekke velgere på. Hvorfor velger så enormt mange å stemme FRP noen steder?


    Donating gear to Ukraine

    I have some military-grade gear from my time in the army that would be useful for anyone sitting in cold, wet conditions, and that has to move a lot. For example a soldier. Can anyone here give me an indication as to how it is best to send it, and what is needed most? How can I ensure that it gets to the people that need it?