The countries with the best quality of life are an social democracies, with left leaning politics. The left is doing fine, that's why the narrative that every socialist country is a failed shit hole has to be pushed so hard.

It's not news, it's low quality political debate. They get a panel of guests in, usually a politician from the two main parties and one other, and a couple of journalists or businesspeople or charity workers.

The audience asks some questions related to current events, and each member of the panel gives an answer. The politicians just repeat the party talking points and focus group approved phrases. The journalists give ideological answers.

There is a strong right wing bias. The moderator is biased, the choice of guests heavily favours the right wing. In the political side they keep having the far right on, but very rarely anyone from even the moderate left. As this study shows, for journalists it's mostly the far right ones too.

Fox News is famous for ignoring stories that make Trump look bad.

The BBC isn't supposed to have a party line. This show has a moderator, but they typically do not express their own opinions. The one they have now is right leaning anyway.

The sister programme Any Questions on Radio 4 is much better. Better moderators, better guests, better questions and debate. Question Time should be better.

I'm just not going to buy unless I really have to. I'll wait for the bubble to burst and the flood of used hardware to come.

Are they any good for that though? Being locked down Apple crap, it's not like you can just plug them into your workstation and your CAD software does the rest.

They hate stuff like this, because it undermines their already flawed understanding of biology. The next step is usually to write it off as too few people to matter.

Their drone tech isn't actually terrible by international standards. Drones complete not just on capabilities, but on price. They do okay on the cost/benefit ratio.

ISPs don't want anyone to do anything, that's how they get their IP blocks shitlisted for spamming, malware, North Korean hackers etc. They all started blocking port 25 long before CGNAT became common.

Is that a good idea though? Being routeable from the internet means having to be secure from all the attacks that come from the internet.

For most people, if they really need that functionality, a VPN or reverse proxy like Cloud flare Zero Trust is a better option.

I know, it sucks that we have to rely on those things instead of all being free to put our stuff directly on the internet from our home broadband, but look at what happened with email servers. Torrents of spam, hacked servers becoming parts of botnets.

It really does seem like a mess of half arsed protocols and spotty support, for basically no gain for the average user. It doesn't solve the problems people have with IPv4, but it does introduce lots of new ones.

For me coffee is the difference between having a good life and being too tied to most of the time. The trade off is worth it.

Speaking of racism, you know what is really racist? Declaring yourself a Jewish state and then committing genocide in the name of Jews, while hiding behind Holocaust victims whenever people criticise that.