Hiker, software engineer (primarily C++, Java, and Python), Minecraft modder, hunter (of the Hunt Showdown variety), biker, adoptive Akronite, and general doer of assorted things.

  • 0 Posts
  • 430 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 10th, 2023

help-circle




  • I really want us to stop throwing the same candidates back at the wall over and over.

    I do think Harris got the short end of the stick, elections internationally show a significant “we’ll take the other guy” vote (regardless of who the other guy is). I wish the people voting paid a bit more attention to who “the other guy” is and what they’re actually proposing.

    I don’t have nearly this distaste for the party’s platform that you do; I actually really like it … we just need to get enough people in office that they can actually legislate without having to caucus with Republicans or on the edge Democrats.

    Honestly though, I think Sanders or AOC would get obliterated. They’re beloved by progressives but this country is just not a country of progressives. I think the last election showed undeniably that the economy rules when it comes to US elections.

    Edit: intentionally -> internationally (dumb phone)








  • like the umbrella wedge/spring to make it open automatically.

    That to me is a very specific algorithm. It’s a simple mechanism but putting it together might be a bit tricky.

    That’s very similar to SHA, it’s a fairly simple set of mechanisms but the actual composure of those ideas into something that works as well as SHA does takes very specific research experience. It’s not at all an abstract idea, it’s a very concrete and specific set of operations that you invented first.

    Imagine if the patent was “an umbrella can open itself with the push of button” no further details. That’s close to the level of detail some software patents are argued at and effectively what the “put a game in your loading screen” patent was awarded on.

    You can’t patent the idea that “an umbrella should be able to open [somehow]” so I likewise think it’s ridiculous that someone was able to parent “your game [somehow] runs another simpler game before it runs.”

    Patents should be to protect very specific research so that the private sector can do said research and profit from it. Patents should not block out broad concepts. The patent in the video game situation was and should’ve been ruled as bogus. It’s not the type of thing anyone needed to research or think about, you just literally go “what if I added a game to my loading screen” and you’re in violation.


  • I think software patents should really only apply to extremely tricky algorithmic “discoveries” (which I would consider inventions, as someone that’s written a SHA256 implementation from reference material, nobody is “just coming up with that”).

    “Ingenuity patents” like that loading screen game are everything that’s wrong with software patents. It’s not all that crazy of an idea to add a game while waiting to play the main game. There’s no radical research required there, just an idea.

    I don’t think vague ideas like “a game in a loading screen” are sufficiently creative to warrant a patent.







  • Re: harder to change, your electoral logic is already self-defeatjng. What do you think you are changing when your electoral logic is, “fall in line vite blue no matter who” including fucking genocide. Who would ever take you seriously? You think they’re going to do anything to “win your vote”? Genocide apologist, they know they already have it. You announced you were giving it to them free of charge, that you will tolerate anything they do and still vote for them, and are actually pressuring others to do the same on their behalf.

    The correct time to express such thoughts is during a primary. We didn’t have one because we had an incumbent; it happens.

    The better place to have this fight is through congress anyways. They’re the ones that actually approve the aid.

    Better yet, go talk to the Israel people and get them to vote for someone that stops using our weapons in such an offensive manor. Israel knows that their position is critical to the US interest and their current leaders are happy to exploit that.

    Literally, abstaining makes you part of the “party of not voting” and nobody does anything for them, because they don’t vote.


  • We are literally in a battle for our ability to vote.

    Abstaining from said battle is effectively saying “I don’t care” and letting Trump do what he will. If he chooses to send nukes to Palestine to end the conflict immediately, that’s on everyone that abstained. If he ends aid to Ukraine and those people die, that’s on everyone that abstained.

    If he ends voting, you “won some moral battle” but you’ve all but permanently lost the war against genocide as the most powerful military and weapons on the planet are now in the hands of an authoritarian, raciest, fascist, regime that previously imposed a “Muslim ban” and I’m sure would happily do so again.

    There is no hypocrisy here, and it’s disingenuous to imply there is.

    If you want to protest genocide, then GO DO IT, don’t throw away a vote because that’s not a protest, it’s a pathetic excuse.