You can choose to be Christian or not, you can not choose to be gay or not, and someone asking you to use their preferred pronouns is not nonsense, and getting fired for showing rampant disrespect towards your peers based on them simply existing seems fair to me.
What happened to hckrnews in the last few years, I'm seeing more and more of this kind of BS.
> Lunagender, also called monagender, monegender, or selenogender (all of which mean in some way "moon gender"), is a fluid gender identity that changes on a consistent, orderly cycle, reminding one of a lunar cycle.
This is cherry-picked/extreme. Besides, it doesn't appear relevant if you intended to actually address what the parent referred to as "not nonsense" in the general sense. It's not relevant to what the GP was saying, either.
You can very much self identitfy with the now uncountable amounts of genders, pronouns, and cases of mental illness misdiagnosed as LGBT nowadays. I'm not saying gay people choose whom they are attracted to. I get that and I truly believe it. But when people identify as queer, bi, asexual (even though they have sex lol) then its something you're opting into. Clear as day seeing as these people can fluctuate their feelings on a whim.
I would say that learning the basics of programming (if then for while functions classes structs etc) is easy and anyone can do it. Learning to think like a programmer is harder but also not super difficult IME.
Being a programmer. Doing it for a living. Getting good at the craft of programming and learning the foot guns and ins and outs of your chosen language/stack/framework. That’s hard. And time consuming.
Once you've torn them limb from limb, once Pecker is rotting in a jail sell and the only thing the National Enquirer is useful for is recycling them into cup holders; then you walk into Playgirl and do a photo shoot of these exact photos just to make sure they all know it was never about the pictures.
Me and my wife are personal patients of Dr. Besh. While it is anecdotal, we have nothing but positive things to say about him and his practice.
He identified a problem with my wife's thumb that was causing pain for years. He root caused it and put a plan in place in our first meeting. He was excellent, professional, fast, and very reasonable.
But you're paying him to help you. The article claims that Tesla is paying him to not help their injured workers. These are not contradictory, he can profit both from being a good doctor and not being a good doctor, (if the claims in the article are right).
I would argue that the only reason those none green things are cheaper is because of unpriced externalities. Externalities that industry isn't going to price in themselves, which means it becomes, again, a political problem
I think the only answer is for green tech to become cheaper, or at least better and more desirable, to an extent that it can overcome all those unpriced externalities.
Consider lighting. When efficient lighting started to take off, it sucked. CFLs were expensive and worked poorly. People avoided them unless they were forced into them or really wanted to be green.
Now, LEDs are awesome. They’re still more expensive up-front, but the breakeven period is really short. They look great. I use them everywhere, not for environmental reasons, but because they’re the best practical choice.
Electric cars are another example. Used to be they were a sacrifice, unless your driving needs fit into a really narrow niche. Now they’re really good. They’re still not cheap, but people who can’t afford them often wish they could, and the prices will come down. Similar to lighting, I don’t drive an electric car to be green (although it’s a nice bonus), I drive it because it’s practical and convenient.
It shouldn’t have to be this way, but I think it does. Maybe it’ll work out anyway. It’s looking possible.
If you don't understand why these people can't leave, then you've never been poor.
The reality for a lot of these people is that they can't really afford to stay where they are, but they equally can not afford to leave.
No one is going to pay to relocate a Janitor from SF to Idaho. That Janitor can barely make there rent, let alone find the deposit for some place they can actually afford, and that's before you take into account moving costs, living while you find new work, etc.
The truth is, moving is expensive, very expensive, and if you live somewhere with a high cost of living, it's hard to drum up that kind of money.
That's nonsense man. I'm literally referring to a woman in the article who sleeps in a parkingarea because she can't pay rent, but she does work, owns a phone, a car, earns more cash than is necessary to pay for her non-rent living expenses.
You're telling me she can't drive, or take a bus?
Because what, she has to move all her belongings from the parking lot she currently lives in?
Come on. Look, my parents were on welfare since I was 3, never had any financial support, I've hustled plenty of times moving places, never having owned a single car. Not a single piece of furniture in my home is new, everything is second hand and half of it I found on the street.
Look I'm not saying it's as easy as opening an email account. Life is hard. But we're talking about a person who is homeless. She's way more capable than you may think, and I'm telling you, the solution to her problem is NOT staying in SF. You know that and I know that.
But even if people can't move without help from third parties, the solution to this problem still isn't letting people who make little money to stay in the most expensive place on earth that they can't afford, it's just not going to work out. It's governments facilitating them to move. I'd completely support that.
As soon as some people leave, who's quality of life will improve, companies will be forced to pay a living wage for those who stay, who's quality of life will improve, too. Would you stay?
My local church is setting up a ton of people from Tijuana who work menial jobs and came here with no money. They help anyone who asks with deposits, transportation, job hunting.
The truth is, moving can be cheap, very cheap, and if you live somewhere with a low price of labor, it's profitable to drum up that kind of support.
Can you show some statistics that proves that is the case? Because I grew up in a poor family surrounded by other poor families and everyone moved around a lot because they were poor and had to continually look for new housing and opportunities.
What happened to hckrnews in the last few years, I'm seeing more and more of this kind of BS.