the topics have different emphasis than in the US, but the principle remains. immigration, de-industrialization, green politics, erosion of trust based society
The real underlying issue is the economic pressure - much worse in East Germany than in West Germany. People have problems, but the real problems are not immigration or green politics.
This is a very obviously biased argument that both sides make about themselves.
The AfD literally published a manifesto of new and notably more conservative policy goals in 2017.
They do not claim to have the political stance of Germany 25 years ago, they themselves say that they are something new (For example, point 1 is an adoption of Swiss-style direct democracy, which is a notable shift to the right).
I encourage you to think much more deeply than "I saw this meme and it resonated with me," because the same is true of the American Tight, despite Elon's claim (Regan, for example, was very famously against Tariffing Canada).
>Since when did direct democracy became a right wing concept?
It's intended to make Parliament powerless (when you read the document, I'm sure you saw that part), so, I'd say it became a right wing concept when it was proposed by a far-right political party in 2017 to move Germany to the right.
So next time if a far right political party suggest that everyone should eat vegetables for good health, then eating vegetables becomes a far right concept?
That’s like the dumbest take ever. Then all the veganism movement for the sake of climate must be right wing as well.
How about the grass is green logic? If the right wing parties started saying that grass is green and that’s the nature then anyone saying the same thing is right wing as well? Like how dumb are you? Don’t you have a brain to think than being brainwashed by left ideological nonsense?
I guess this must be extremely subjective because for 15 years now in my country the far-right has been "on the rise" and all the politicians, and a lot of the media, now only talk about the immigration, the immigration and all the "normal" right-wingers, centrists and even soft left try to compete for being the one who will say the least "politically correct" thing, that is something about how immigration is not compatible with our culture or something. The right-wing party has split and one part is now allied with the far-right party.
My impression is that the overton window has gone further and further to the right so chacun voit midi à sa porte
A rose by any other name etc. The moniker may change once every few years - even A. Occasional Cortex recently agreed that 'Woke 1.0 was craaaazy' [1] - but the beast never loses its stripes. Maybe the next term will be 'Woke 2.0', maybe something else but seeing how as this terminology comes from inside the narrative generator it can not be denied that it describes something real and as such claiming that those who use such terms that have fallen by the wayside '[are] not worth listening to' is the equivalent of loudly saying NA NA NA I DON'T HEAR YOU NA NA NA.
Woke 1.0 was 'crazy' indeed, good that this can now be said. The successor will probably be just as crazy but in some different way. It most likely will be some throwback to classical marxist tropes instead of the intersectional mess which best describes 'Woke 1.0' because younger generations never experienced the reality of the Soviet bloc, never were taught the reality of life under communism in school and as such are easy targets for socialist propaganda, viz. the success of the DSA. This time it will surely work, people, real socialism has never been tried after all...
If you insist on believing the story she told of that being said by 'a political friend', sure. Did you listen to the interview she gave? I did. It sounded very much like the 'politician friend' was made up from thin air to enable her to bring this quote into the conversation. It was she who produced the quote, the 'politician friend' has not been heard from. In other words, believe what you want but first listen to that interview?
it's funny you can't stop claiming to understand everything from politics but still can't imagine that there actually are other politicians (Chi Ossé's comments made the rounds before AOC repeated it) out there than your favorite target
We're talking politics here so that bit about 'claiming to understand everything from politics' is misplaced.
Call it what you want, everything needs to be turned into a meme after all. I call it 'observations' and go by those, not by narrative or attempts at memecasting.
Who is my favourite target by the way? As far as I can remember this is the first time I mentioned this politico on this - or any other - forum. Also, could you maybe say something about the actual subject here which is the grand-grand-grand-grandparent post stating that 'anyone who thinks "woke" is a valid counterpoint is not worth listening to'? You seem to be trying to do the same when it comes to what you're trying to call 'hagbardisms'. You haven't actually touched the original subject yet, what about it?
Does that include those like the mentioned politica who espouses the virtues of the next iteration of 'woke' because the first version was craaaazy? If so I do applaud you, it is indeed and best left to the historians for dissection. If not, why not?
I would not recommend Safari as I have completely stopped supporting it many years ago due to Apples hostile approach towards developers and the fact it's broken beyond internet explorer levels and has been in this sorry state for at least a decade. I don't know if people still using it have some special use cases or just don't know you can install another browser.
Sure. But CVEs don't enumerate RCEs/vulnerabilities that reveal user passwords - they care about a superset of all of that. And when you look at the common vulnerabilities in phpBB3, "phpBB3 hasn't had a single severe vulnerability" seems like very selective language.
I am merely giving my unprofessional opinion that phpBB(1+) has only caused harm. A significant portion of leaks seem to be attributed to it. They really could have done better, and their reputation is forever dead.
To make clear: I am sure that the current version of phpBB works just fine and isn't as disease ridden as we all know it to be. However, the fact that all of these issues have existed for so long means that perhaps we need to take a look at the software as a product and determine that its performance has not been good enough, and to expect similar performance in the future.
Beware of VirtualBox. While part of it is free, it's not very useful without the extension package. This package is easy to download on the same website as VirtualBox, but... it's not free.
Even better Oracle tracks the ips that download this extension and after a suitable amount of time they will come knocking on your company's door asking for an insulting amount of money (e.g. more expensive than VMware) or get sued. You need to read the fine print of the additional Eula printed in really small letters on the VirtualBox website to figure out the extension isn't free. It's almost a honeypot tactic. Scummy.
I don't know how Macs fare, but on Linux the extension package is not really a great feat, mostly adds RDP and some faster USB modes, but USB passthrough is marginal at most anyway.
That's a reductive way to phrase it, but more or less yes.
It's arguable if the container is "virtualized linux" as they all share a single linux kernel. In reality there's one virtual machine, one linux kernel, and many linux userspaces (one per container), which is kinda the whole point of containers.
Over docker+linux, the virtual machine is the only additional layer.
fwiw, I personally don't use macOS, so I've only got virtualized linux (containers) run by docker running on linux running on my hardware.
Are you trying to make a point or something here? Like, yes, we've built layers of abstraction that include different types of virtualization (VMs and containers), and they compose. Is that all you're observing?
> Are you trying to make a point or something here?
Nah, just curious/intrigued by how these stack.
OS-level virtualization is very much a thing. I'd be interesting to compare this to the approach taken by Docker Dekstop for Mac. I bet they do something quite similar (hypervisor-based virtualization like Virtualbox) - nothing fancy like WSL1 that I believe runs a sort of "tortured" Linux kernel inside the NT kernel.
WSL1 didn't run a Linux kernel at all - it was implementing the Linux user-space API over the Windows NT kernel. Well, some of it - not enough to run Docker, for example.
Docker on Windows and Mac does the same as what is described above - it runs a Linux VM and runs the docker server inside that, and then does a little magic to expose native OS paths and so on to that VM. On Windows, it uses WSL2 by default now, but WSL2 is also a Hyper-V VM in the end, with some Windows magic to blend it more nicely in Windows workflows.
That’s how it has to work when there’s a kernel mismatch from host to guest. You’re implying more layers than there actually are.
- MacOS running a hypervisor
- A Linux VM with Docker installed.
- A Linux container running on that VMs kernel.
Containers on Linux aren’t virtualized (normally, you could use runV I suppose if you wanted). The only overhead is the extra disk space to extract the root fs of the container image and the namespacing.
I’m also using Hyperkit w/ minikube, and after some heavy setup automation it works pretty great. What I worry about, though, is what I’m going to do when I switch to a Mac w/ Apple Silicon. AFAICT Hyperkit is x64-only.
https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1519735033950470144/photo/1?
the topics have different emphasis than in the US, but the principle remains. immigration, de-industrialization, green politics, erosion of trust based society
reply