alcoholicorn [comrade/them, doe/deer]

Meanwhile, Dev of company C driving off a bridge, getting laid off after modernizing the 90s era codebase.

Only problem is accepting dates in anything except YYYYMMDD, or unix time stamps if you need more precision.

Nope.

Oh, and I forgot to mention, Ronald Reagan’s admin was the reason NASA had to launch so quickly, he wanted to mention it during the State Of The Union Address.

We’re lucky that he didn’t give someone a medal for blowing up a passenger aircraft (again).

Back in the early 70s, NASA engineer tests on a part indicated that a joint with 2 O-rings was too wide and could expose the o-ring. Northrop Grumman and NASA’s project manager said it was fine, 2 o-rings meant one was redundent right? and the design made it into the solid rocket booster.

Then in 1977, a different test indicated 1 oring was letting gas during certain levels of mechanical stress. The engineers proposed a solution, which was ignored.

Then in 1980, they asked to test what would happen if 1 oring weren’t there and what would happen if the oring was cold. This was denied.

Then in 1981, a return booster was inspected and they found soot between the orings and one eroded, and the problem was added to the critical issues list. And ignored.

This happened again in 1984.

In 1985, they realized when the oring was cold at launch, the problem got way worse. Northrop Grumman finally changed the design to fix it.

But they had a bunch of the old, unsafe part laying around, and NASA didn’t want to miss deadlines, so in January of 1986, they launched a shuttle with the part that they knew was unsafe in cold conditions, coldest morning they’d ever launched and a middle-school class watched a live stream of their teacher exploding 10 miles in the air.

It’s the thing you use to create a local copy of the main code base, and then merge your changes back in.

OP hasn’t done anything, and there’s 7 conflicts between his code and main. Presumably because someone else merged their changes in the time between when OP pulled his local copy and tried to push his (non-existent) changes.

A company tried that in 1999/2000, just before the dot com bust.

You got a $500 PC for free, but were locked into a contract with an ISP and had to spend 10 hours a week on the PC, and 1/3 of the screen was ads at all times.

We’re moving in that direction, but nothing is free.

The idea that something that affects society can be nonpolitical is just your bias towards the status quo.

Everything was always political, and the status quo has always depended on hordes of lumpen trained to identify with their own oppressors over their own interests.

Before there were networks of right-wing radio and websites distributing right-wing talking points, they just used TV, newspapers, mailing lists, posters, etc. The effect was still 100 million Americans cheering when the national guard shot students protesting against the state sending their friends to die while participating in atrocities in Vietnam.

Even gardening is political; the notion that you should only plant grass and ornamental plants, mow your lawn once a week, and any deviation was a flaw was popularized and enforced by William Levitt to keep people from having too much time to read and become communists.

Similar sentiments spring up after the civil war regarding edible gardening and use of fruiting trees in urban planning, for fear that black people will live off foraging instead of working.

I don’t think it has a meaningful effect. Libs call themselves socialists all the time. For every case you’re able to argue for socialism and not have people’s brains shut down, you get 10 “those tankies aren’t real socialists! Socialism is when you for food stamps and means-tested college subsidies”

I use all 3.

If it’s very short and there’s 2 or more in a row, I’ll put it all in one line.

If there’s a bunch of nested if statements, I’ll use the second.

If neither of those conditons, I’ll use the first.

No idea. I can see why they’d do it if someone was giving out invites to tons of people who literally do not seed, but you can’t expect everyone to have a good ratio since they must all average out to 1.

I think most of the talk is just to encourage seeding.

It’s fundamentally impossible for everyone to have a positive ratio.

clever newspeak

If that’s what you want to call it. I was just using the old-timey term to contextualize US actions in Ukraine/China/Iran/DPRK/Niger among the hundred other wars waged for the same purpose over the last couple centuries.

Oh, sorry then, I must have misunderstood.

Since federation, a lot of libs who’ve never encountered a leftist opinion have been calling us russian or chinese bots for not supporting the latest imperialist adventures.

Hexbear is one of the oldest lemmy instances, but only recently started federating.

Are you suggesting that for the last 3+ years, someone was running a troll farm where the trolls could only talk to each other?

Correct, this isn’t a serious discussion, I don’t genuinely disagree with everything Kruschev did other than sending the tanks into Hungary and supporting Cuba, nor attribute everything the USSR did during that time to Kruschev; I imagine H3doubehockeysticks has more nuanced takes on the USSR and China.

I think they’re referring to Chinese support of the Khmer Rouge. Obviously they’re not the ones who engineered the coup that put Pol Pot’s faction in power (see America), but not siding with the USSR and Vietnam against them was a p big L.

OK, two things he did right.

The fallout from the sinosoviet split and destalinization can’t be overstated though.

Why are you trying to make them defend Khrushchev? It’s hard to find someone who agrees with anything else the guy did, but sending in the tanks to put down an uprising co-opted by nazis is pretty unambiguously good, though history tells us he didn’t do enough to purge the Hungarian right.