Yeah if there's no one in front of you and someone can undertake you, you fucked up. I'm glad to see this thread full of so many sensible takes on how to drive safely and maintain efficient flows of traffic. Normally these threads online get flooded with brain dead takes like "I'm going fast enough, why should I move?".

It's pretty noticeable on Lemmy. I'm not entirely sure why there's so many bad actors on here. On the one hand the small community means their hate dominates many threads, on the other there's barely anyone here to influence.

There's definitely also a lot of people who see the bad example created by bad actors and copy their style of discourse. I imagine a bunch of them will show up in this thread.

It's gotten a lot better in recent years tbf in terms of those kinds of resources. Beginner recommended languages like Python are still a pain because it's super easy for a beginner to bork how they set it up, but on the whole there's plenty of online code sandboxes and other ways to get started.

Your point is definitely valid though. Why on earth would we want someone who's just showing an interest in programming to write their own compiler??? Wtf? If someone wants to get into baking you don't send them out into the fields for 6 months to grow some wheat.

When I was a kid I mucked around with html and css to make some GeoCities sites. I decided I wanted to learn how to code so I got a book from the library called "how to code games for beginners" or something. The thing never told you how to set up an IDE or compile the game. So I was just frustratingly typing out the code examples into notepad without a clue as to what to do. I think this was during the dialup era so it wasn't like there was a wealth of info online.

I ended up abandoning programming for quite a few years. It just seemed like nonsense because writing graphics libs for C in notepad does feel like nonsense to a child. I wonder what life would be like if I had some better resources at that moment in time and decided you continue pursuing it.

I believe from last time I checked that it was more an issue of LG not approving the app to be listed rather than it not being available. It being a wrapper makes sense too on the older webOS apps as it's basically a PWA with some JS libs to interact with the TV.

I got a chrome cast because nordvpn didn't have an LG app and the jellyfin client works great on that. Still annoying it's not baked in though.

You have to remember a lot of the people posting that bs likely aren't Americans and either have an anti western agenda or are being paid to post divisive shit. It's annoying because Lemmy is such a small community that these accounts appear wayyyyy more than they really should, so it gives the impression that there's loads of them, but really they are a minority. Chances are they also have a bunch of smurf accounts so it could literally just be one room of guys posting mountains of bullshit every day.

I was just giving you some context. It isn't some new complaint that's just popped up. It's also not a huge deal. You do you if you want to keep using the word "females" instead of women.

Re: the Streisand effect. Anyone getting excited that they've found a new "trigger" and choosing to use it despite someone else calmly suggesting that a different word is better isn't really worth any consideration.

Unadjusted pay figures is an interesting one. On the one hand adjusted pay scales makes it really clear whether people are being paid the same for the same work, on the other hand unadjusted could potentially highlight areas for improvement in terms of adjustments for new mothers etc. That's tricky though as if the father works for a different company and can't take time off to look after a new born then the mother will likely have to. Why not release both along with the weightings?

At least 10 or 15 years ago was when I first got informed about it. It's likely been problematic for much longer. Its really not that hard to use the word "women" instead. Usually when people refer to men they use the word "men", so it's only fair to use women also. Females feels a bit icky tbf. Like women are a different species or something.

Spain would probably be around that much if my calculations are correct.

They really aren't worth the time. They probably aren't even a real person. If you look at their post history its literally nothing but FUD aimed at getting trump elected. Hundreds of posts every day. They either aren't very well (unlikely), or they are an agent of some kind. Don't feed the troll.

MMR was the boogeyman jab that started the whole modern antivax movement. I wouldn't say it's rare for antivax people to be opposed to getting the measles vaccination.

Again that figure is the "total outstanding" amount and isn't the yearly cost. If a mistake during childbirth causes permanent disabilities for that child over the course of their life then the compensation will be a decent sum paid out over a long time. There are other better targets for saving budget or raising tax revenues.

We need to grow the economy from the bottom up. Trickle down has been proven to be bullshit. There's plenty of scope to raise taxes on corporations and via asset/investment returns marginally to offset investment in growing the economy and helping the worst off. The report you linked says that the UK has a lower total tax burden than many other developed nations. We don't need to go crazy, but at the moment the tax burden is too heavy on big workers and too light on capital.

Rather than ask "how can we afford this?" try asking "how can we not?" The country is in a dire state. Cutting taxes on the wealthy and cutting services and benefits haven't worked, trying it again is daft.

We found billions and billions for daft tax cuts and juicy contracts to Tory donors for dodgy services and contacts. No one asks "how can we afford this?" when it's tax cuts for corporations or selling off profitable public owned assets. I think we can afford to spend a little more on helping people survive. The money spent on welfare also doesn't just disappear, it goes straight back into the economy. The very poorest people can't afford to have savings, it all gets spent on essentials.

Growing the economy is very difficult when people don't have any money to spend. It's a giant weight around the economy's neck. If the Tories hadn't been burning the country down for the last 14 years we wouldn't have as many people struggling in poverty and wouldn't have to spend as much. Unfortunately they have so we do.

How about we raise taxes on the wealthy and corporations, and reinvest that money into supporting the people of the nation and trying to grow the economy?

It's also not one third of the NHS budget. The total "cost of harm" to the NHS Inc legal costs was £6.6bn in 2022-2023, the total budget was £180bn. That's around 3.5%. Just use some common sense and think about what one third of the budget would imply. Is one third of the NHS made up of lawyers? Do you know just as many NHS lawyers as you do nurses and doctors? Double check "facts" that sound unbelievable and via outrageous before spewing them out for others to be misled by.

I get what you're saying but I don't think the "manager telling someone not to quit" is correct as an analogy. We're all here because we wanted to be a part of a different community than reddit. That to me is the fixed interest. We want to build an online space that we all enjoy being part of.

To build that space us early adopters who have an interest in seeing it succeed unfortunately need to bear the brunt of the painful startup process. Any small online community formed by people leaving a previous space (that doesn't have central control) will initially have a large number of assholes. The amount of "I've been banned from reddit X times" comments is way too high. Those people will eventually be drowned out by a larger population of nice people if the nice people stick around. Only by trying to build the space we want to see will it get built.

It's either that or we all ditch federated spaces and go back to reddit. Leaving the tankies and other toxic people to Lemmy.

Because the community on Lemmy is so much smaller it's a lot easier for small groups of dedicated posters to dominate discussions on certain topics.

I've noticed a lot of the same behaviour as you have on certain topics. Unfortunately it's difficult because like you say engaging on those topics is frustrating because the people with an agenda have more time and energy than you to dedicate to pushing their narrative, and aren't open to more nuanced discussion.

There's an interesting blog I think about regularly about online communities that I think you might find interesting: https://eev.ee/blog/2016/07/22/on-a-technicality/

Now that article calls for banning of assholes. I don't think that'll work on lemmy, so instead I propose this: If you just accept that those people are going to continue to do their thing and instead engage in the more positive parts of Lemmy then overall we might be able to build a bigger community of people who add positively to Lemmy. If you or others who are being pushed away leave then the asshole : positive people ratio will only get worse.

Oh yeah it's definitely a great start and I don't want to let perfect be the enemy of good enough. Hopefully it all goes well and further liberalisation can follow, along with changes to treaties to expand even further. I was just a bit shocked when I saw the low amount you can have at home.

Theoretically, if two adults lived at home would the limit be 100g? That might make things less stressful.

I agree that limiting the amount you can have personally makes sense. 50g is just way too little I think. A very normal sized plant in a standard pot will easily produce significantly more than 50g of bud.

There definitely needs to be a limit. Not letting people have more than a kg for example 100% makes sense. Letting people grow their own is a fantastic way to cut out the black market. But we need to make sure that people who are growing their own don't need to fret so much about staying under a very low gram limit. If people like me are worried about accidentally letting the plant grow so it produces 51g of dried material then I'm less likely to do it myself and will acquire it another way.

If the limit is say 200g then you could comfortably grow one plant in a normal sized pot. Harvest it. And be under the limit without stress, and not need to buy any for a whole year until you grow more the next year. No need to buy from a black market then.

67wpm 97% accuracy with chrooma keyboard and swipe. Switched to gboard and only got 54/87.

Yeah it's a bit concerning as I was planning on doing a balcony grow. If that leaves me exposed to a "justifiable" police raid to check if I have >= 51 grams of product then it feels much less legal than it should be. Hopefully they change that up, but with how long it took to get to this point and the lower political capital of the coalition that might be a long time coming.

It's still a bit concerning that we don't have clear guidelines on how growing and harvesting these plants will be enforced with this very low limit. If someone grows 1 plant and doesn't smoke the harvest quickly enough they might have say 300g of harvest and they suddenly go from legal while it's growing to illegal 2 days later. If you're in a state where they might want to be stricter on growing this could be a real problem.

Having limits on grams carried in public whilst not part of a cannabis club makes sense to me, but this restriction on quantities at home when you are home growing doesn't.