We don’t have time to wait for kids to grow up before doing what we can. Ah, sorry. Before putting all of that responsibility on them and screaming “NOT IT!”

“we need more resources” is bounded by the rate at which you can incorporate new teams members without absolutely destroying your productivity, or having a bunch of untrained fools running around breaking things (of course the later is standard at many places already, so I guess it doesn’t always matter).

The right answer is usually : “No”. Or at least “Prioritize”. Or “This is what we need to get it done” at which point they might start to get software takes time to make decently, and they don’t want software that doesn’t work decently in the first place.

Never touched it? A website? What about updating frameworks for security issues?

The closest I got to this kind of job., is the closest I got to running away. I’m much happier elsewhere now.

This, to a point.

Other things help :

• Unit test to help catch regressions. If you are confident in your test catching a good portion of bugs from refactoring, at least you feel confident refactoring. Worst case, at least you ensured your code is testable. There is nothing worse than refactoring untestable code.
• Self-documenting code and when it fails to self-document, comments or refer to a wiki page.

I think this depends on the crowd. Unfortunately, the intelligent crowd and the crowd with money and power is not exactly the same. Though hopefully there is overlap.

I think this points to a large problem in our society is how we train and pick our managers. Oh wait we don’t. They pick us.

We’ve done this to a point in Montreal (parts of alleyways that were deemed unnecessary were de-paved, and small plants planted there. We don’t grow food there, but it looks nice, reduces traffic in alleyways and should help have less paved surfaces for heat in hot summer days.

It has literally been tried. You don’t control the world. China, North Korea, Iran and India get to do what they want. They have their own interests too look out for and could care less about a European country being invaded by another European country.

Which is “ok” as wages will start to go up over time (for some). But some wages don’t climb as fast and some people are on fixed revenue (old people, disabled people).

So it requires readjustments

I was under the impression that even in other countries, activism is generally separate from the political parties and it’s more like activist groups putting pressure on candidates and organizing for them if they are more favorable, and sometimes getting something in return.

I’ve seen exceptions, but I gather they are rare (and we can already see some change as the party is under pressure to become more “normal” and “competitive”).

Don’t tempt the fates. You will get this, but everything else will be worse.

Trust me. Don’t temp the fates.

THIS.

All the rest of this conversation is pedantic nonsense (on both sides, I might add).

It’s like if the law decided that only fire brick red as defined by this website is red : https://html-color.codes/red

And then someone on lemmy said “the court said your car isn’t red”. And then we’d have to spend a half hour and an incredibly long post to explain how courts sometimes use different definitions for words that people use in normal conversation, and to be careful how you interpret that.

Bottom line is Trump did what everyone else is calling rape.

Nah, she just wants to reply some snarky comments that don’t really inform people other than letting them know she thinks they are wrong, and that’s she thinks she’s some kind of authority on the matter.

People who appear intelligent to the average person, are either slightly more intelligent than their audience, or charismatic.

Really smart people can be hard to follow unless they put efforts in communication skills or are charismatic (but that might be the same thing?)

Maybe it’s because it creates such nice little echochambers.

Protip: Your argument has more weight if you use modern examples if you can find them, rather than the Weimar republic. Sounding like you are escalating to the end of Godwin’s law does not help your point.

Which is annoying because I agree that it can backfire if done wrong.

Sorry for the late reply, the lack of a red envelope makes me not notice replies.

People on election day have to decide if they go voting at all. This is a big deal, it’s what most of the campaign in the ridding is focusing on changing (you want to make sure all of your voters go vote, that is top priority in an election).

Having a party that is a bad fit for you is demotivating and likely­ to reduce turnout. That is what I mean by “likely to vote”. It’s not the right wing option that people will go for. It’s the comfort of staying home and not bothering to vote for a “lib” if you’re a progressive, or for a “commie” if you’re a lib. For some people, the NDP is already too far right…

So yeah, some of the support of the NDP would transfer over to the liberal party, but definitely not all. And that’s not to mention all of the crazy people who can go from NDP to tories at the drop of a hat (voters have shallower roots than the base, or have irrational hatred of specific politicians or parties) or who would just vote Bloq Québécois or something else.

Takes time to become ubiquitous.

Yes. They will start doing so when it is too late for that to help.