![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/94b2b808-7c9c-4de0-a35b-966d14ae40fd.png)
Ah thank you, I should’ve read more closely :)
Ah thank you, I should’ve read more closely :)
Sure, but closed source audits aren’t often made public. So we don’t know when, or how, closed source software is audited. Beyond just our ability to self audit open source, we often get better reporting on the contracted audits performed on open source software.
This is really awesome — open source allows for auditing. Not great that there are vulnerabilities, but these vulnerabilities also exist (and possibly more) in closed source software that doesn’t get audited to be fixed, just exploited. Hopefully these get patched soon!
If taxes are robbery then using public infrastructure like roads without paying taxes is also theft.
Taxes exist because public goods are actually good, and benefit everyone. The sum of the parts is greater than the individual parts. Your taxes pay for roads and public transit which are used to get people to work to create wealth for a community. It turns out the thing that makes humans great is community and banding together. Taxes are a formal way of doing that.
Now, we need equitable taxes, but that would involve taxing the rich proportionally. This is economically sound because wealth doesn’t trickle down and the mega wealthy are, well, mega wealthy because they hoard wealth. That money would be better spent creating better roads, better public transit, better education, or in short, a better community. The prospect of a better community only upsets those who are not members of the community, because their insane wealth puts them in a different class, and those who think defending that class will somehow get them privilege. The only privilege we need is a better community.
Certainly a possibility, but I almost think US quietly supporting Ukraine will make it easier, since it won’t be in the far right zeitgeist as much. Ukraine needs financial and military support. Passing bills individually for Ukraine is getting harder. Tacking another line item on to a “Support Israel” bill that provides military and financial assistance to Ukraine may be easier than new bills aimed at just supporting Ukraine would be.
Edit: to be clear, I’m hoping Ukraine gets more support from this, as my personal view is strongly in support of Ukraine. I don’t know that this will pan out that way, but I see a potential angle for it if democrats have the savvy to do it.
I think Russia probably encouraged this, but I think it’s another miscalculation. America is set up at this point to fight proxy wars. Now all that happens is Israel weapons gets added as a line item alongside Ukraine on a defense budget bill that’s now easier to pass. So they may have been involved or just encouraged, but I think it’s gonna backfire.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whataboutism
Or the Oxford definition:
what·a·bout·ism /ˌ(h)wədəˈboudizəm/ nounBRITISH the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counteraccusation or raising a different issue.
Edit: downvoting the actual definition from two external, highly authoritative sources that support my previous comments is certainly an interesting choice
Ignoring the ad hominem in your post, I never said Hamas was Palestine. I said that things done to Palestine are grotesque. I said this action by Hamas was grotesque, and replying to the original commenter that it was “almost as bad” as heinous acts done by the recipient of this evil act does not justify this evil act.
And the Holocaust has literally nothing to do with this discussion, as you mention. Better to make your point would be to actually discuss whataboutism as a definition and provide discussion for why making a counter accusational justification doesn’t qualify as whataboutism (note: the definition of whataboutism is literally responding to an accusation with a counter accusation in an attempt to side step the issue, which I believe is exactly what happened here, eg “this evil act (the accusation) is actually not that bad because of the other evil acts of Israel (counter accusation)”).
So my argument still stands to the tenets by definition, I never equated Hamas to Palestine (and in fact made the same point that acts done to them were also horrible), and never defended Israel or Hamas. I just don’t believe that killing civilians, or committing war crimes or attempting terror campaigns, is justifiable (by either side).
What Israel does is as you described. But can we please not use whataboutism to try and justify barbaric behavior? This is grotesque. Things done to Palestine are grotesque. Let’s just call evil things evil and not try and say “hey cause someone else did an evil this evil is okay.”
That’s a good point, I don’t remember much ghosting on those. I guess it might depend on the phosphor used. If it was tuned to only fluoresce for that imperceptible off time and no longer it would probably work.
I guess it’s a similar idea to quantum dots, but if those quantum dots fluoresced for just a bit longer.
I think this would result in some pretty intense ghosting and other undesirable artifacts.
Solvents and other residues can off gas over weeks and months (or possibly longer) without any burning.