Tehranian’s talking about death to inanimate abstractions that must be interpreted figuratively have an excuse that competent English writers who understand coherent literal meanings do not. We don’t use “death to” this way: the right word is “fuck”, eg, “fuck traffic!”, “fuck Israel!”.

Don’t know what you mean, but they did join the US in Afghanistan & Iraq through NATO by again complacently following the US into whatever.

I’d for the longest time wondered why Europe has been so complacent in letting the US dominate the geopolitical agenda. Could it be by letting the US overspend on military, EU can instead invest in better living standards for themselves & mooch off US military support through NATO if the need ever arises?

And nearly all US computer hardware is manufactured in China. What’s your point?

Nah, just putting words together doesn’t make them true, and they aren’t. The parties consistently vote differently & non-cooperatively on legislation as roll call votes & their analyses show.

• According to roll call analysis, non-cooperation in Congress has increased exponentially over at least 6 decades, and dissatisfaction with weak congressional productivity may be due to harder ideologues failing to realize that.

  Excerpts

  partisanship or non-cooperation in the U.S. Congress has been increasing exponentially for over 60 years with no sign of abating or reversing

  See graphs of probability distributions of cross- & same-party pair agreements increasingly diverge over congressional sessions. See networks of pairwise agreements between members for each congressional session increasingly split by party over time. From historical heights of cross-party cooperation around the 1970s, cross-party agreement has declined significantly at an exponential rate as same-party agreement has grown.

  Cooperator prevalence has decreased by two orders of magnitude from the 1970s to 2000s. From 1967 to 1979, Congress often had over 10,000 cooperators (max: 12,921) and was comprised of at least 10% cooperators (max: 13.4%), i.e. at least 10% of CP pairs agreed on more issues than SP pairs. In comparison, 2001–2010 held fewer than 1,500 cooperators (min: 181) with fewer than 1.5% (min: 0.2%) of CP pairs acting as cooperators (Table 1). Longitudinally, partisanship/non-cooperation has been increasing at an annual rate of about 5% over the last 60 years. The average number of disagreements on roll call votes between CP pairs is increasing exponentially (Fig 3A), as illustrated by an exponential growth model in the form of y = c₀e^γt which exhibits a fit (F₃₁ = 236.22, α = 0.05, R² = 0.88, p < 0.0001).

  The harder ideologues who claim their parties aren’t partisan enough instead of recognizing the partisanship is peaking may paradoxically be contributing to their own dissatisfaction with congressional productivity.

  Our analysis shows that Congressional partisanship has been increasing exponentially for over 60 years, and has had negative effects on Congressional productivity. This is particularly apparent in the steady reduction of the number of bills introduced onto the floor, suggesting that the primary negative effect of increasing partisanship is a loss of Congressional innovation.

  This increase in non-cooperation leads to an interesting electoral paradox. While U.S. voters have been selecting increasingly partisan representatives for 40 years, public opinion of the U.S. Congress has been steadily declining.

  Voters might believe that highly partisan candidates will ‘tip the scale’ in one party’s favor. However, based on correlations shown here, a partisan candidate may lack cooperation needed to pass legislation.

  Current affairs do not explain this height in party division.

  Certainly current affairs do not seem to divide potential cooperators, as cross-party relationships peaked in arguably the most tumultuous period in recent U.S. history, marked with numerous political assassinations and Vietnam War and the resignation of President Nixon, as illustrated by others, such as [23–25].

• DW-NOMINATE scores of congressional voting records confirm increasingly polarized party voting.

• An analysis of party conformity over the last 2 decades finds higher party unity among Democrats.

  In the House and the Senate, the average party conformity score was higher for Democrats than Republicans over the nearly 18,000 total votes taken. Democrats in the House voted with their party 90.4 percent of the time; Republicans in the House, 89.3 percent of the time. In the Senate, the gulf was wider: Democrats lined up 89.8 percent of the time while Republicans did so only 86.6 percent of the time.

  Over the past 20 years, Democrats have, in fact, been more likely to stick together on votes than have Republicans.

Not voting as hardline ideologues would want doesn’t imply they aren’t the representatives people voted for or the parties are cooperating. More than ever, the parties largely aren’t cooperating, because they’re as partisan people voted (particularly on the right).

cheaper = ecologically friendlier? NOPE

Why 3D print them? Isn’t that more ecologically wasteful than just getting any of the mass-produced ones? They aren’t exactly hard to come by. Fuck your wasteful printing.

I consider this impossible in light of past decisions, such as Excel’s inability to handle elements of the human genome properly. This forced the scientific community to change the names of these elements due to Microsoft’s refusal to fix an obvious Excel bug. In other words, because of Microsoft, all of us citizens of the world have been affected by the change of the names of some elements of our genome, with all that this entails for scientific research and, consequently, for the treatment of genetic diseases.

The fault there lies with scientists who refuse to “git gud” & not use shit software.

skill issue, failed parenting, & cash grab

Or random word(s): easier to tell a service agent.

• opinion
• missing basic functionality available on the website

choose one

It seems absurd to defend the incapacity & redundancy of a deficient technology. Did you miss the part where OP can’t set the URL of their post & doesn’t seem able to perform an easy edit? The URL in the body is still wrong.

It actually saves on resources because it’s not loading in CSS and JS.

I see no evidence of that: I’m pretty sure all clients load a web engine and related resources including CSS, which means you’re installing a redundant, special-purpose web client when you already have a general web client installed. Plus, lacking basic functionality as OP states makes it the opposite of useful.

OP just stated it’s less capable by lacking basic features from the website, so if “works great” means “works like shit”, then I’ll concede your point.

Does your device not have a web browser that can go to the far more capable website?

“Though this app wastes more space, it also works worse!” doesn’t seem a compelling value proposition.

skill issue

Comments taken from this post https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/123a6d45-dfca-49ac-891c-d535025d7cb6.png

Failing to link to the correct source is a crime both to web accessibility & humanity.

Did you know it is possible to edit your post & set the URL field?

If you publish there, you are supporting right wing propaganda.

Not how taking a cut of subscription revenue works. If you publish right wing propaganda, then maybe you have a point.

Yes, and that’s exactly why the article is important.

Explaining to us how subscriptions work like we’re idiots is important? Or was that common knowledge a revelation for you?

Link to roll calls votes you’re referring to?

Educating

“education”

@lemmy.ml

of course!