Better a few Boomers lose their shirts than decades or centuries of techno-fascism.

Because only boomers have investments.

Your whining is the same thing that has been said for centuries whenever a new technology or process has come along. I can guarantee you would have been one of those whining when the cotton gin was invented, or cars and airplanes started being made. This is how society advances. If you don't like, you don't have to participate.

You need rage bait and outrage porn to engage people on the internet

On r/lawncare, it's people's shoes and dogs shitting on the lawn. On r/laundry, it's people either deliberately telling you what piece of clothing is dirty and asking how to clean it, or showing the labels.

I don't have an account, but even I can recognize this astroturfing. It's being deliberately done to get views.

The problem is, that is not true. I have seen multiple cases in which the information in an article is well sourced, in that the facts in the article are attributable to reliable sources, but the subject is considered not notable by many editors because he or she is not considered of sufficient interest. In some cases, the deletion is pretty clearly justified by a specific policy, namely that a person known only because of a single event is generally not considered notable. Even that policy is not a bright line since people known for a single event who have been in the public eye still have articles devoted to them. An example is Lee Harvey Oswald. He is only known for assassinating President Kennedy, but there is a lot of interest in him, so he has his own article, not merely a mention of his role in the article on the Kennedy assassination. Other cases are still more subjective.

One consequence of this is that there is a huge disparity between people in different walks of life. It seems like any band that ever got out of somebody's garage gets or any professional athlete, however minor, gets a detailed article, while people arguably of greater significance in areas that don't attract as much popular interest do not.

It is reasonable that Wikipedia should not want articles about your next door neighbor Joe, who may be a great guy but has not done anything notable, but the current policy is highly subjective and excludes a lot of people whom one might want to look up in an encyclopedia precisely because they turn up in the news or in a specialized area but are not widely known celebrities. The policy in its current form not only allows the deletion of interesting articles about people some people would want to know about, but it encourages unproductive deletion debates.

What delusional world do you live that the taxpayers don't have a right to know where their tax dollars are being spent?

Companies are private entities. They do not operate under the same rules as government. Your example is invalid.

It's called transparency. It's what good government does. When you work for the government you give up some of your privacy becausse you are working for the people.

You must work for Trump to think the people don't have a right to know what their government is doing.

I understood that reference. :)

Loser thinking is dropping everything at the drop of a hat based on nothing more than one article written by somebody nobody has heard of on a fringe website.

Loser thinking is dumping tech stocks because they said they might make a few million dollars less in the next 3 months than they anticipated despite them making money hand over fist.

"You young pup!"

Now I'm sad. :(

He used to do a one man show of a Christmas Carol on stage. I never got to see it, but I always imagined it being amazing (based on the fact that it happened more than once... if it were ass, it would not have recurred). While the source material is relatively friendly to the idea, one man shows are hard to do well.

What's with the black leather jacket he always wears? Does he think he's the Fonz? Or a Ramone?

Essentially, his wife and daughter made the choice:

For a bit more on the subject:

DuckDuckGo allows you to do this. On their homepage you can choose between a regular search or an AI search. I have my default page set to no AI.

Political appointees should be public, they are accountable. The rest of civil servants are no different to you doing your job at your place of employment.

Civil servants are paid by the tax dollars. The public has a right to know who their tax dollars are going to.

In my state there is a web site where you can look up the salary of those who work for the government. It includes the person's name and their position title.

If you ask Gemini why Google's search results have gotten so bad, it will give you an honest answer and suggest you use DuckDuckGo instead. Not exactly sure how you monetize "our service is telling our customers to go to our competitors instead" unless you're Macy's and you're in a Christmas movie.

<rainier_wolfcastle_thats_the_joke.jpg>

Well, ed is the default. And I still use ed a bit. But mostly I use Emacs.

I use Emacs daily, as I have done for 44 years. I use it for all of my programming, for editing flat-file databases, of which I do a great deal, for making notes, and for some kinds of writing. Even if I use LibreOffice Writer for a piece of writing, I will often draft it in Emacs first, then use LibreOffice Writer to format it. I find text-editing, as opposed to formatting, much more efficient in Emacs.