This is just fucking misogyny. If the best insult you can think of against Elon Musk is to call him a woman, then you just hate women. Anyone who thinks this is actually good, you are part of the problem, just go vote for fucking Trump

Notice how pro-nuclear people always point towards a bunch of fictional technology as the solution? Oh, we just need fusion, or breeder reactors, or a bunch of other shit that doesn’t exist. No, bro, we just need to build renewables and proper energy grids. It’s really not that complicated. If it’s not sunny where you live, then you just get electricity from where it is sunny. It’s really really simple

Nuclear energy is a solution looking for a problem. Total tech bro bullshit. Like crypto.

Are you fucking serious? Nuclear power plants cost way fucking more than some cables. You people are fundamentally so unserious. Pull your head out of a reactor for ten seconds and take reality as it exists

and breeder reactors are more expensive than faerie magic, I prefer to use technologies that are actually real rather than things I wish were real

yes

There is a huge lobby of pro-nuclear think tanks who try to astroturf pro-nuclear shit onto social media. We, scientifically literate, rational people, need to counteract these harmful narratives with some facts.

FACT: Renewable sources of energy are as cheap or cheaper per kwh than nuclear.

FACT: Renewables are faster to provision than nuclear.

FACT: Renewables are as clean, or cleaner, than nuclear.

FACT: Renewables are much more flexible and responsive to energy fluctuations than nuclear.

FACT: Renewables will only get cheaper. Nuclear will only get more expensive, because uranium mining will get harder and harder as we deplete easily accessible sources.

Nuclear isn’t in competition with fossil fuels, it’s in competition with renewables. Renewables are better than nuclear by pretty much every conceivable metric. So fuck nuclear power, it’s a waste of money and time.

When energy storage and transmission methods are also not up to the task, nuclear becomes the best answer.

Obviously, the best answer is to improve energy storage and transmission infrastructure. Why would we waste hundreds of millions on a stupid toy power plant when we could spend 10% of that money on just running decent underground cables.

and we can have 100% clean, renewable energy in 2024, we just don’t need the nuclear reactor

Nuclear may have been good 10 years ago, but it isn’t really good anymore. This is like saying “if I had bought a PS2 in 2002 then I would have had fun playing Final Fantasy XI Online. Therefore, I should buy a PS2 and FFXI Online so I can have fun in 2024”. That ship has sailed

Just for context, I’m an experienced software engineer with years of experience with both C++ and C#, as well as several others, including Rust. You can do shallow and deep copies in C# as well, it’s done extremely infrequently because it’s usually a bit of a code smell and it has some downsides - it’s inefficient both for performance and for memory.

In C# the assignment operator will copy the value if it’s a value type (structs and primitives) and copy the reference if it’s a reference type (classes). It does that because it’s a garbage collected language and it needs to track how memory is referenced and so on.

The whole debate about what languages are better is honestly a bit silly, IMO. C, C++, Python, C#, Javascript, Rust, they all serve their purpose, they have their strengths and weaknesses.

Sure you can, it’s the same in C# as it would be in C++ if you did a=b, where a and b are both pointers.

You don’t want to copy the full data of a class around every time you use it, that would have extremely poor performance. If you do want that behaviour, use structs instead of classes. If you need to clone a class for whatever reason, you can do that too, but it’s not really something that you should need to do all that often.

I don’t think you should really jump in and call something crappy if you just don’t really know how to use it, personally!

May all of the for-profit websites chip and shatter.

We don’t need them. We have never needed them.

Let’s take the internet back to when it was a place where people ran websites for things they cared about.

Fuck profits, fuck corporations, fuck capitalism. Solidarity across the working class.

This is a “cool tech kid” opinion. Linux is for EVERYONE. Let’s not gatekeep it. Having GUI tools and stuff that is so easy to use that tech-illiterate people can use Linux is a great thing.

Great news, this isn’t actually true!

Okay, well, the number of people alive the exact same number of years as you is gonna go down. But that number is arbitrary and doesn’t matter.

The thing is as you get older the difference between you and people younger/older than you gets smaller and smaller. You’ve probably noticed that as you get older you can form relationships more easily with people even years older/younger than yourself.

As you get older, more potential friendships and relationships open up to you, until you’re well into old age.

I stopped using streaming platforms personally and just went back to pirating music. Personally I don’t want to support Spotify because they continue to support far-right ideology with their podcasts, but that’s a completely personal decision.

If your main reason for paying premium is for ad blocking, I’d suggest just cancelling it now and using ad blockers. If you want to support creators, I’d say that it’s better to cancel and subscribe to a few patreons - I’d pick some of the smaller creators you like, to spread some of that support around a bit.

If you use iOS devices for watching YouTube, look into side-loading uYou+, it’s basically an edited YouTube app that removes most of the ads. You can stream from your phone to the apple TV, too, also without ads.

Not sure what the android equivalent is, but someone else will know - hopefully they will share in the comments also.

I’m not sure I really understand who you’re referring to when you write “OP”, but either way, I think that that with the additional context I explained above, the comment reply of “women do not exist for you to have sex” is quite understandable - I personally don’t feel that it is fair to describe it as a non-sequitur.

Honestly, I find it kind of weird that the top level comment (as written by Lightor) is more about how the movement would affect him, and I think that it probably demonstrates that he isn’t really the ally he seems to think he is. In my opinion, if he really was “one of the good guys”, he wouldn’t have written his comment the way he did.

Anyways, I think I’ve said all I have to say - thanks again for the respectful conversation, and I hope you have a great day, much love and solidarity!

Again, I totally get your point, and I think it’s a worthwhile conversation to have, but that’s not really what I’m here to talk about - I’m just trying to explain what happened in the comment thread, why people got upset, and how we can avoid that so that we can have open and productive conversations about these really sensitive topics without upsetting people.

The reality is that women so often have to deal with men trying to control their sexuality, so when we’re talking about these topics in good faith, we really need to be extra cautious that we’re handling these topics delicately and respectfully.

Thanks again for the reply - I think I understand your point, which I think is genuinely interesting and worthy of discussion, but there is just something about the phrasing that feels off to me, and just to be clear, I’m sure it’s unintentional. I’m sure we can both agree that we would always want to make everyone feel safe, respected and valued, but sometimes we can accidentally say (or write) things in a way that come across in a way that we don’t intend.

In my opinion, talking about women ‘withholding’ sex as a ‘punishment’ implies a certain level of expectation or entitlement, like men are entitled to have sex with women and if they don’t have sex then they’re punishing men. This is something that I think a lot of us sort of struggle to recognise as harmful, because we all are human and we know that we all have a need for sex, both men and women - but historically, this kind of framing, that men are entitled to sex with women. has been used to excuse violent sexual crimes

There’s totally a valid conversation to be had about how effective this movement could be, but I think that it’s really important that men like myself need to start from a place of recognising that our behaviour can be really hurtful to women, even when we don’t intend it to be, and that we listen to them when they tell us that we can make really simple small changes to protect their humanity, make them feel safe and valued, and recognise the part that we all play - consciously and unconsciously - in the system that has mistreated women for longer than we can possibly fathom.