Stop fucking around. Make one that can run a country and check proposed and existing laws and practices for constitutional, common sense, and human rights violations. Use it to check and criticize everything the federal government does. Ask that it be used to indicate things that shouldn't be done. Charge fifty cents per citizen a month and guarantee that it'll be better.
Alberta has energy. Canada wants energy without Alberta. The Candu reactor program is so defunct that the feds have been trying to sell it for about a decade. Candu makes plutonium and was responsible for a lot of nuclear weapons proliferation in the 1980s, but again, Candu isn't Alberta. Also it's a way to spend an enormous amount of money, and Canada isn't quite bankrupt yet.
I say go for it.
I can't support any business that tries to make their product mandatory. Someone says here he's not scum, he is absolutely delusional scum. Does anyone else think having the government mandate what you can buy is a good idea?
Another company designed a saw which did the same thing and which didn't destroy a $200 cartridge and the blade. He said he'd sue them into oblivion. He's a greedy prick who would see people maimed before he'd give up the profits on his half-assed, shitty, Chinese made trash.
Use a blade guard, ffs. Don't support this asshole.
I think anything you can mount the computer in a drawer. Not having the case sitting on the floor or on the desk sounds really nice.
I've told my wife for several years that I'm going to make a desk with a hinged top, and every night at midnight a small motor lifts it up until everything slides off onto the floor. That way people wouldn't stack random junk on my desk rather than figuring out where it should really go.
Beware: I got the perfect under-desk shelf for a NUC-style computer, and it kept shutting down. The fit was too perfect, and the computer's cooling vents couldn't get the job done.
I've done things that people thought were magic. It was TC.
There are about twenty similar programs, all descended from the Norton Commander. Any one of them is enormously better than the file managers that come with most OSs, especially windows. Ive read estimates that say you're about four times as productive if you use on, and I think that may be very conservative. There are a lot of things you can't do without one.
A friend worked at a place where management disabled the search function in windows, probably because people were getting stuff done. I set him up with TC, which has its own search.
The IT lead at one place I worked said, "I don't like that program. it makes things easier than they should be."
TC is the best of its kind. It's so good I paid for it. (I've had twenty years of free upgrades.)
>Any one of them is enormously better than the file managers that come with most OSs, especially windows.
I duuno mate, I find the MacOS but especially the default Gnome file manager to be much more limited than the latest Windows Explorer in functionality. Gnome Files is a joke really, feels more like something on a mobile device.
The thing is, file managers that come with mainstream OSs are not designed to appease power users, as they will install their own personal favorite one anyway, but to make life easy for the average joe who doesn't know much about computers, files, extensions, etc. That's why they're so simplistic out of the box.
Something like TC, would be really confusing for the user who just wants to view the best photos in the download folder and drag and drop them to the Gmail in Chrome.
Trying to appease power users is an exercise in futility anyway, no matter what you do, someone will cry that his favorite and most used feature is still missing, so most SW companies don't even bother anymore with the tiny power-user market share if they also aren't paying customers. TC is one of the few exceptions that survived by including everything and the kitchen sink.
HN users should learn to detach themselves form the power-user mentality and empathize with the average joe who isn't tech savvy and has no interest in becoming tech savvy as they have other hobbies than learning how their computer works under the hood and becoming 40% more efficient with their file-management-fu.
I remember once I needed to rename a bunch of files to a template similar to NewName_001, upwards of 100. TC lets you just set a name pattern and follows it, which meant I did it in about 10 seconds. My colleague took 10 minutes and a lot of groaning about "why isn't there a better way?".
(This is just to help macOS Finder users, not to say, "Well, Finder can do it too!!)
You can select multiple files in Finder > Right-click on one of them > Rename. That'll bring up a modal with some bulk-rename options, including a name pattern. It's not intuitive, but was really cool when I found it for the first time!
That's awesome! I use a Mac-based software similar to TC (after years of using TC on Windows), and always use it for bulk renaming. I had no idea I could do the same with Finder, I'll definitely take advantage of that in the future!
I've been looking for a Linux alternative ever since I mostly switched away from Windows a few years ago, and so far this one is the best FOSS alternative I found: https://doublecmd.sourceforge.io/ - it's even written in Pascal, same as TC.
MC is great for the terminal, but I'm more of a GUI guy - Total Commander has introduced some improvements over the original Norton Commander (e.g. showing file icons, right-click context menus etc.) which I don't want to miss anymore...
I've used norton since 1993 IIRC, the 2-pane model is properly baked in my mind. Now with tabs, it is magical. At least to literally all colleagues I've shown it. Lightweight, performant, stable.
Sftp client, great recursive file content search including archives, file comparison, editing files directly in archives, plugins etc.
The thing is, everybody is wow at efficiency boost but almost nobody picks it up afterwards, they go back to slow basic clunky multiple windows. When I see how slow they are (easily 10-20x, more complex stuff they have to use other programs ot cant do at all), even my otherwise calm manners become... less calm.
I've tried gui variants on linux when I was toying with ubuntu few years ago, unstable, slow, basic. I hope its better now.
"...disabled the search function in windows ... Why are they trying to make things difficult for people?"
If you do embedded system development it is best to turn Windows Search off.
Windows Search will write index files to devices that are not expecting to have such files written to them, which often bricks the devices. Old Freescale/NXP boards are particularly prone to this, until their bootloaders are updated, which can only be done on a Windows-7 machine.
Oddly if you do turn Windows Search off via registry key, then the Microsoft Store stops working correctly. I've never found that behavior documented anywhere.
I read this story in my teens and was fascinated. Those who remember it will be horrified by some of the postulated advances, especially in the field of dentistry.
I don't wish to comment on the truth of various popular ideas, but the selective way in which research is funded on on matters such as global warming, fusion, and Alzheimer's is strikingly similar to those suggested in the story, and, I believe, observed by that author.
It's interesting to note that this sort of thing is quickly internalized - people are not just quick to follow the money, they're quick to believe what they have to in order to get it.
I think this has led to a creeping belief that while science is important, it can properly be done in an atmosphere where the truth has been received before the facts are at all clear.
I hope it's obvious that this isn't true.
I'm following the protests. I'm not sure why a cruel and sadistic minority can run a country, but it happens. I'm inclined to wonder why the US military, pulling out, didn't arm every woman and intellectual in the country.
I won't forget his name.
because it wasn't a minority. The Iranian revolution had wide backing, the Shah was an absolute monarch who came to power in a coup. Women and students featured pretty prominently as well. Lots of the tactics today like women opposing the military directly were used back then too.
The revolution had a wide backing, but - importantly! - it was a revolution against the Shah, not in favour of Islamic fundamentalism. The hard-liners were merely the most prepared to step into the power vacuum that followed.
Calling it the "Islamic Revolution", as state-sponsored history books do, is crass revisionism.
> The only citizens extreme enough to correct this happened to also be religious extremists
That's not what happens; it's that in these neo-colonialist situations, all secular dissidents can be imprisoned and murdered (with US help), but religious dissidents can't safely be. So when the revolution succeeds, the religious take over. Same thing happened with Morsi in Egypt.
It's not exactly that simple: Islamists (and religion in general) is also perceived to be an antidote to Marxism. At the height of the Cold War and bordering Soviet Union, the west resorted to creating and supporting religious groups "Mujahedin" in Afghanistan (Taliban v0.1) and Khomeini in Iran.
The Late Shah of Iran is on record constantly warning about "Red regression" (referring to Communists) and "Black regression" (referring to Islamic fundamentalists) as threats of the nation and the 1979 revolution succeeded by them joining forces (and the commies got the axe afterwards). Funny that in the western world, we are seeing the extreme left/woke anti-Americans and the Islamists join forces again too, despite being cut of very different clothes: the general American left narrative is silent on issues of Islam (particularly bad when it comes to women and LGBT) as it contradicts their own narrative of fighting "Islamophobia". I doubt this ends well.
Look no further than Ilhan Omar: Islam, anti-imperialism (BDS), LGBT-activism (mostly T-activism these days), and radical feminism have joined forces.
Or the extreme lack of coverage of Iran protests in the major US newspapers despite their unprecedented scale and spread across the world (dare it looks anti-Hijab and exposes Islam as a threat) as another example.
I'm surprised you see this as a controversial claim. Here's how an Iranian women's right activist discusses how she's alienated by the Feminist crowd because she is against forced Hijab in Iran, making Islam look bad: https://www.hbo.com/real-time-with-bill-maher/season-20/29-s...
This behavior is par for the course of the contemporary western left narrative. A western country behaving like France restricting Hijab to some degree gets many times more exposure than Taliban and Islamic Republic mandatory Hijab.
> Look no further than Ilhan Omar: Islam, anti-imperialism (BDS), LGBT-activism (mostly T-activism these days), and radical feminism have joined forces. . . . I’m surprised you see this as a controversial claim.
Looks like you’ve been taking in a lot of ideological media. Do you have a reality-based citation?
Which stance of hers that I listed do you dispute? Ad hominem much?
I attached a link to an interview describing concrete circumstances. Did you watch it before making your assertion, for example?
If you suggest that is not representative or whatever please make your claim specific. Otherwise it must be you that cannot see reality when faced with it; I cannot take your comment seriously.
Yeah there an incident of Muslims protesting LGBTQ+ content in Dearborn schools/libraries just a week or two ago. The left protects groups like Muslims because it's the right thing to do, regardless if that group can be hateful towards certain groups. The majority of Muslims used to vote for Republicans until 9/11, because Republicans continued to generally be against them while the Democrats stopped after realized hating a whole group over the actions of less 0.1% of them was actually bad. The Muslims I know mostly vote Republican locally, and Democrat nationally.
I have a child who had Crohns. This has been known since antibiotics were invented. All IBS conditions are caused by the wrong gut bacteria - typically c. diff - and the cure rate for fecal bacteriotherapy is about 95% in one shot. It's ludicrous that we're still studying this and acting as though it's such a mystery, while people suffer and die.
You are confusing Crohn's, an inflammatory bowel condition that is life long and can often be disfiguring and requiring surgery with IBS which is completely unrelated, non-inflammatory (if it were then it would not be IBS), with distressing but not usually life limiting sequelae. Do you even know what IBS stands for?
The fact is we do not understand the complete mechanisms of either Crohn's or IBS, but based on their presentation and treatment it is unlikely they are too closely related - and it is likely that IBS is itself due to multiple factors - hence it is a syndrome, not a disease.
Given this, it is hogwash to say all of any kind of condition is caused by one thing. And if there was a cure with 95% effectiveness, I am sure many of the affluent IBS sufferers on this site would have figured it out by now.
> and the cure rate for fecal bacteriotherapy is about 95% in one shot. It's ludicrous that we're still studying this and acting as though it's such a mystery.
reply