lengau

I'm less mad at Steam and Google because there are clear, simple ways to avoid their cuts.

I have no basis to say whether they're providing a service worth the 30% charge. I'm also less mad at Steam than at Google because they're being less shady about trying to push people into their store too.

I think a better analogy would be that you're tuning your bike for better performance because the trade-offs of switching to a car are worse than keeping the bike.

It's all about trade-offs. Here are a few reasons why one might care about performance in their Python code:

1. Performance is often more tied to the code than to the interpreter - an O(n³) algorithm in blazing fast C won't necessarily perform any better than an O(nlogn) algorithm in Python.
2. Just because this particular Python code isn't particularly performance constrained doesn't mean you're okay with it taking twice as long.
3. Rewriting a large code base can be very expensive and error-prone. Converting small, very performance-sensitive parts of the code to a compiled language while keeping the bulk of the business logic in Python is often a much better value proposition.

These are also performance benefits one can get essentially for free with linter rules.

Anecdotally: in my final year of university I took a computational physics class. Many of my classmates wrote their simulations in C or C++. I would rotate between Matlab, Octave and Python. During one of our labs where we wrote particle simulations, I wrote and ran Octave and Python simulations in the time it took my classmates to write their C/C++ versions, and the two fastest simulations in the class were my Octave and Python ones, respectively. (The professor's own sim came in third place). The overhead my classmates had dealing with poorly optimised code that caused constant cache misses was far greater than the interpreter overhead in my code (though at the time I don't think I could have explained why their code was so slow compared to mine).

I use almost exclusively FOSS and I have monthly/annual contributions set up for various projects.

This takes me back to my childhood... My dad would take me to the fair and get me a deep fried router on a stick and a roll of cat5.

What does this do over what the collabora tools in Nextcloud do?

In the however many years of crash detection with Pixels I've had a single false positive, and that was when I was biking over some very rough gravel and suddenly hit brakes. It was also very obvious and was easy to stop before it called the emergency services.

FPTP is only one problem with the system. But it's still a problem pretty much everywhere that has it. There are many other things that make it particularly worse in the US, but that doesn't make it not a problem with it.

"Building an alternative" doesn't happen in the ballot box. It happens everywhere else.

It happens by getting a better voting system rather than FPTP, for which I'm doing actual, active advocacy. (Are you?)

It happens by working at a grassroots level to get people with better opinions elected, all the way down to local judges, city council members and library boards, where I, once again, am active. (Are you?)

It happens by getting involved in politics at a local level and building a movement. I'm doing that. (Are you?) It doesn't happen by throwing a tantrum in the voting booth.

The fascists know this. The fascists use this to their advantage. And the fascists would absolutely love for there to be 10 competing leftist parties acting as a spoiler effect for liberals. Because as bad as liberals are, fascists are worse.

Throwing out a "no u" when I point out how the things you are doing are paving the way for fascists is not a good argument unless your goal is to actually get fascists into power. And I will choose liberalism over fascism, because that's the harm reduction path to leftism, whereas letting the fascists win is the harm maximisation path.

Yes yes, we all see the rhetorical trap you're trying to deploy. It's not exactly subtle.

Meanwhile in the real world, in most of the US there is no realistic alternative to the red/blue dichotomy, and so while we're actually building that alternative we have to choose between those two. At the national level and in most (possibly all) senate/house races, that's the reality of the situation. You either work with the coalition you think is less evil and try to convince them to be even less evil, or you admit that you're okay with the more evil option if it gives you a feeling of moral superiority.

That's a non-sequitur, because that's not what's happening by any means. But thanks for ceding the point that you're okay feeling morally superior by doing something that'll get more people killed.