You know that repeating what you’re being told verbatim isn’t an argument, right? I have a hunch you’re not really clear on the meaning of the word “substance”… Parroting concepts defined in books, without the actual substance from the book, or without your own interpretation, is about as useful as a page number without a title…

So far, aside from vague conceptual buzzwords, you have contributed nothing else than “I know you are, but what am I?”.

So, again, let’s cut short, this ain’t Mario, I don’t have several lives to try again. Thanks.

I only downvoted you because I very honestly find your rhetoric dangerously wrong.

I have nothing personal against you, but you unfortunately answered nothing of substance, so I will elect to agree to disagree, and stop wasting each other’s time. 🙂

deleted by creator

There are 2781 billionaires. That’s it. 2781. Saying they are a subset of the bourgeoisie is like saying that saying that a blade of grass is a subset of a forest.

Technically, one could argue that a single molecule in a forest is a subset of the forest, but by any rational standard, a subset of something needs to exhibit similar properties. It needs to be relatable.

And compared to billionaires, the bourgeoisie isn’t different from any of us. They are pawns, they are poor, and they are negligible.

The actual bourgeoisie, as in the texts you probably have read, and take this concept from, is a thing of the past. It is gone. In our modern world, their wealth has to be extracted differently, but it has to be extracted too.

The discrepancy between billionaires and the rest, in wealth (US$14.2 trillion out of US$110 trillion - the Gross World Product, GWP - (or 12.91%); or out of US$184 trillion - the world’s GDP in terms of PPP - (or 7.72%)), or in demographics (2781 people among 8100000000 (or, 0.000034%)) is making them a glitch.

To illustrate my point better (or at least try to), if we were to divide the entire planet according to that monetary value, each of those billionaires would own between 0.02‰ (GDP) and 0.05‰ (GWP) of the entire planet, on average. That’s equivalent to slices of the planet of 36 arcseconds (GDP) or 1 arcminute (GWP), on its entire latitude, and up to its rotation axle, per billionaire. Those would respectively correspond to slices 1.11km or 1.86km wide at the equator, or 789m or 1.31km wide at 45° latitude.

So, they are not part of our system, of the stupid LARP we all decided to play. They are on the side of it, exploiting it and making friends with the admins. They are not different from 14 year olds who found an infinite money glitch in an online game and keep pressing the fucking button over an over as if it would stop their parent’s divorce.

Eliminating class distinctions will not eliminate the existence of the billionaires. They will still have the same wealth, and so, the same power, because their wealth, or power, does not come from their status, as it used to; or as it does in the literature you are very likely (given the Marxist Leninist roots of this corner of the internet) basing yourself upon. It comes a psychotic abuse of systemic glitches.

Almost none of the literature you can find on the subject of classes will account for this. It is all so outdated it is irrelevant.

More than irrelevant, it is critically dangerous. Saying that “eliminating classes distinctions eliminates the existence of billionaires” is not just wrong: it is giving billionaires an opportunity to gaslight us further by pretending not to be the problem.

The bourgeoisie is bad.

But the real problem are the billionaires.

Don’t mix the two, killing all the bourgeois will not help us now. I’m not saying it should be off the table, I’m saying it would be a red herring the billionaires would likely employ to save their asses.

#killallbillionaires.

Alternatively, tax all worth beyond 1 billion at a 100% rate, and kill no one.

Let’s see which happens first…

Glad to learn that HTTP/0.9 is still “in use globally” then. A bit surprising, but since it’s all about stretching definitions past what is reasonable, for the sole purpose of having the last word, let’s shoehorn anything into anything to the infinity and beyond!!! 🤡🚀

“Can’t share item,” was the header. “You cannot share this item because it has been flagged as inappropriate,” read the body text.

FAFO.

We’ve been fanfaring for a decade and a fucking half for people not to see “the cloud” as a miracle solution, and to use it carefully. We’ve been warning that it is a blatant invitation to vendor lock in, that it is singlehandedly creating oligopolies, and that exactly this would happen.

Did people listen? No. Did they aggressively confront (or passive-aggressively ostracise) us? You bet your bottom dollar they did.

And now? Now they come around with surprised_pika.gif faces and whine to whoever listens that they are victims, and that they couldn’t “possibly have seen this coming”.

No. They are enablers of abusers, they themselves abused anyone with even a modicum of common sense, and they brought this upon themselves a thousand times over.

FAFO. And at this point, reading such story fills me with the most powerful schadenfreude I have ever experienced.

With a 52% percent mortality rate, this might well be the last such opportunity. One way or another. 😬

Seeing that I’m a senior dev, take it any way you want.

How about blackholing google to limit the damage instead? And you could limit it further by not using services that you know feed data to google.

Junior dev:

Straight out of uni, know the latest developments while having also studied long established standards and specifications (like POSIX, LSB, SQL, etc), full of energy, and ready to speedrun burning out any %

Senior dev:

Hasn’t learned anything substantial in decades, uses outdated specs because “who got the time for that, and legacy stuff works just as well anyway”, copy pastes most of their work from stack overflow, is only still employed because of their inside information knowledge and the utter absence of documentation leading to a bus factor of one, and has perfected the art of gaming the system to the point of photoshopping a sloppy IDE screen over their WoW game whenever a picture of them “working” gets taken.

Yeah, checks out.

I feel cucked having google only get most of my traffic. I am an alpha male, I want them to get all of my traffic.

Usually that’s about when I strace the process before running it through gdb…

Yeah totally merge everything, people like a good spaghetti salad.

Love how nuanced this is 🙃

In that case, your second and subsequent points should have no text, since the source material has no text for them. And the last point can’t arguably have text at all either way. 😉

More seriously, the source material has both texts and images, and it was your choice to only represent half of that. You could have easily written:

Technically, “without text nor image”. Your list is implying otherwise.

Finally someone is making sense. I was getting depressed with all the logical metric inspired units disguised as jokes everywhere in this thread. You get it. Thank you 🙏

Additionally to the other answer: the reason CISC came up to be was “less instructions”. Memory was a lot more expensive, and developers worked in assembly a lot more. So, less instructions made a lot of sense. Now, memory is cheap, and developers almost never write assembly unassisted.

Substantially. CISC vs RISC is night and day. Keeping x86 for so long was a mistake, but one that generated billions in value for shareholders.