us economists are hardly at threat of being disappeared for criticizing the economy

read where?

Just going to point out: russian culture doesnt use nazi in the same way we do; largely they dont view nazis as ontologically bad because of the bigotry or the antisemitism or the genocide of many peoples, but because they were an existential threat to russia or russian ethnicities. a lot of the associations westerners have about nazis are just not widespread in russia. this is why there are a lot of seemingly idiosyncratic phrasings in this kind of stuff.

I mean I disagree about not sympathizing with folks somewhat trapped in a hostile software ecosystem, but surely “stand by your beliefs” is not unheard of.

Yeah I don’t agree with the osd being the only approach to being open source. Turns out people have differing opinions on that. You’re welcome.

It wasn’t a response to my comment because you didn’t respond to my comment. You said is proprietary. I point out that it’s not a terrible license. Then you resort to a sound bite non response.

You could have pointed out for example that ftl 3.2 and 4.1 are pretty shitty limitations to impose.

Ah. Of course. Something being open source doesn’t make it open source. It all makes sense now thank you for clarifying.

That also wasn’t technically a response to my comment, it was an ideological defense mechanism to avoid addressing the content of the license.

This license while not the most permitting does not appear to hide the code behind any proprietary shielding though.

Freecad has improved considerably in the last year, to a point where I’ve gone from saying I will wait to use it, to recommending it. It may actually have been designed for humans now.

Important to differentiate in context learning and training.

What purpose did you think the quotes served?

Yes, I’m not going to devote much time engaging with comments very very interested in bringing up their unsympathetic idea of genocide real politik.

People often mistake convenient and unsympathetic rationalizations of their own views as realism.

“Civilians want to stop being bombed en masse, more open to demands of bombers” isn’t exactly the argument you think it is.

Your comment also fully assumes that the goals of Israel are to reduce war sentiment in Palestine.

Among other odd issues in this comment, ultimately you’re not addressing the core issue people are taking with Israel’s choices by taking a hard-line ‘realism’ stance.

Being your own bank is 99% of the problems crypto runs into. It turns out being your own bank is hard and makes most people into marks. This is of course, by design, and most of the space, the vast majority of the space, is scams.

Also bitcoin has kept its promises just as much as USD has. That’s not really a useful metric.

Not only is the noise ratio low, this seems like a good lesson in “encyclopedias are not primary sources nor arbiters nor authorities on information.” Yes, people use Wikipedia that way anyway. No, baking in an even lower trust system does not seem like it’s actually a fix to any of Wikipedia’s problems.

If that’s what you feel is the case if you don’t separate politics from technology then that sounds like a personal problem to address.

Technology and ethics and politics are not airgapped magically distinct things. Pretending that they are is a strategic political choice you are actively making.

“People want to talk about the things they care about when they should be talking about the things I care about!”

Alternatively, lol

I’m just pointing out that cyberpunks issues were issues fixable with updates.

Starfields issues are writing and character, largely. Gameplay is rough, but not the core issue.

Of course, it’s not just like cyberpunk. Cyberpunk had excellent writing, good pacing, and an overall fascinating story with technically good writing. It just was immersed in a game that had many issues for many people.

Star field is almost the exact opposite, it’s technically functional, with a hollowed out uncooked unseasoned potato for a story.