The argument isn’t to say its better or good. Rather, it is arguing that all likely alternatives to said politician would show the same homophobia policy. So given a frame of reference of politicians of that time, their LGBT policy doesn’t make them worse than realistic alternatives.

Thank you Luigi for freeing me from the chains of capitalism

Oh wait, his CEO killing changed nothing. Okay back to work I guess.

Upon rereading, it looks like I misunderstood it due to conflating it with some other comments, so you’re right. I apologize for the misunderstanding, and will edit my comment accordingly.

With due respect, that’s quite different than the claim you explained in the comment I replied to, so I hope you will edit it to clarify that. edit: I seem to have misunderstood the original comment.

As to the point you stated in quotes in this comment (edit: which is what OP originally intended), I don’t see how they’re related. Criticizing China’s crackdown on dissent must not mean you should deny their credit on executing CEOs.

Thank you for your comment. From my skimming of the articles you sent, they seem to argue that the state has a track record of cracking down on dissent and protests.

I’m not sure this proves your initial claim though (that CEO executions were done to combat government criticism), unless there’s a detail in these articles that I missed by skimming too fast. Please let me know if I missed it.

While your claim is plausible, it is also equally plausible that they are acting within the defines of their state ideology, and we would need more evidence to prove it is one or the other.

Disclaimer: I only skimmed the articles and did not attempt to verify the evidence they present, as it didn’t seem that they are addressing your initial claims.

So it’s planned economy that you’re disputing

No.

My question is very clear, why can’t you address it without pretending I asked something else?

Again, you made the claim that CEO executions were made for the reason of seeking more control. Please provide proof that they were done for this reason and not any other reason. I have not asked for planned economy proof or anything else.

If your next comment does not answer my question, then you are being intentionally misleading

So which non-Marxist political economy or sociology defines this elite class? Usually class politics is attributed to Marx

The comment I replied to says:

Working class rebel vs Elite class looking for more control

Notice the part highlighted in bold. I am asking for proof of this. In other words, proof that the Chinese government executed CEOs only because they sought “more control”. Surely we are not expected to blindly trust this claim, right?

I wonder that too. Do you have proof that it does?

Please show your work. What is the proof that it was done for more control?

Please show your work. What is the proof that it was done to consolidate power?

This isn’t to mention that your use of the word authority is strange. How exactly do you determine who has more authority between a US house representative vs. a CEO?

Not world news. It’s an internal matter of the US.

Unfortunately this is just PR speak. While the Lebanese resistance was very successful in repelling an occupation of Lebanon, israel has succeeded in forcing them to abandon the support front for Gaza. I do not blame them at all, but it makes the victory in Lebanon bittersweet.

Contribute code on github!

As someone who is not deep into type theory or functional programming, can you please explain why you mean by “ergonomic overloading”?

My understanding is that ocaml mitigates the need for type classes through its more advanced module system. So far I have been enjoying the use of OCaml modules, so I’m curious what exactly I’m missing out on, if any.

Thanks for taking the time to talk with me btw!

What are your thoughts on this comparison? https://github.com/sidkshatriya/me/blob/master/007-My-Thoughts-on-OCaml-vs-Haskell-Rust-2023.md

Tell us more about unison

I know double semicolons are a thing, but I’ve never had to use them. I forget what they’re for, but yeah it’s supposed to be an escape hatch for something that shouldn’t be happening iirc.

The curried snd uncurried functions… Maybe you are confusing with SML, because everything in ocaml is curried by default. Though admittedly the standard library could be more complete, but I personally am happy to use third party dependencies for less common things.

Sad I had to scroll to the end to see this.

Ocaml is brilliant and has the nicest type features. It’s almost like Haskell but more approachable imo.

Striking terror in the hearts of genocidal invaders is a good thing yeah