Daniel Dvorkin @medigoth@qoto.org

It's synthetic, I swear!

This is your erratically scheduled reminder that building rock #cairns when you're out #hiking is not a way to show your love of #wilderness, or a cute little addition to the #scenery. It's #vandalism at best, and gets much worse from there. Please stop.

https://www.google.com/search?q=environmental+effect+of+rock+cairns

@freemo Yeah, I think that's what it comes down to: there is no protocol for a US President attending a British coronation, because there's never been a need for it!

I'm not opposed to the *existence* of the monarchy. My father, who was born in England and grew up in South Africa when it was still part of the Empire, has pointed out that there's real value in separating the head of state from the head of government: all the patriotic foofaraw can attach to the throne while Parliament gets on with the actual business of governing. In the US we have a bad habit of attaching quasi-mystical significance to the Presidency.

But I do think it would be inappropriate for the President to go to any coronation, and the British one in particular. Of course the Revolution was a long time ago, and the UK and the US have been steadfast allies for over a century. Nonetheless, there are parts of our shared history I'd rather not see forgotten.

You might think #Republicans would understand why the #elected leader of a #republic doesn’t attend the #coronation of a foreign #monarch. Particularly when the republic in question established its existence by breaking away from *that particular* #monarchy. But apparently this is too much to ask.

So a #Russian "diplomat" tried to steal a #Ukrainian flag on what was supposed to be neutral ground, and, uh, it didn't go well.

From the comments on the #Quora post: “Russian flag stealer, go fuck yourself”.

https://onlytruthaboutrussia.quora.com/Russian-delegate-tried-to-take-down-Ukrainian-flag-but-got-a-fist-in-the-nose-VIDEO

Some answers just etc.

https://www.quora.com/Badass-Who-is-the-biggest-fictional-bad-ass-of-all-time/answer/Daniel-Dvorkin-3

@Pat, nice! You were way ahead of me. I think the first time I used a modem I could just plug the phone cord into was 1985 or so.

Putting this here for my own use as much as anything, as a handy copypasta for anyone who mouths off about #NATO and the #US "#provoking" the #Ukraine #war, or insists that Ukraine must "#negotiate a #settlement" with #Russia. If you like it, feel free to re-use as you see fit.

===

Ukraine applied for NATO membership before the war and got turned down. That's pretty much the opposite of provocation on NATO's part.

If Russia were really worried about NATO expansion, they could have taken it up at any time with any of the NATO countries bordering Russia. But nope, somehow invading Ukraine was containing NATO ...

... oops, turns out what it did was make Finland and Sweden abandon their long-standing neutrality and *more than double* Russia's border with NATO countries.

Anyway, back in 1991, they signed an agreement to honor (and indeed, to defend) Ukraine's borders. Since then, they've invaded Crimea, the Donbas, and now the rest of the country. So what *possible* settlement could:

1. Be acceptable to both Ukraine and Russia,
2. Ensure Ukraine's continuing survival as a nation, and
3. Russia be trusted to honor?

I'd really like to know.

Another day, another #moralpanic about Those #Kids These Days and all the #Crazy Stuff They Say On The #Internet.

Forty years ago (!) I was a fourteen-year-old #JROTC cadet, in the last great hot time of the #ColdWar, obsessed with reading #SoldierOfFortune. I was also an early adopter of what's now called social media.

They were called bulletin board systems, or #BBSs for short. Usually somebody's home computer with a few phone lines coming in. You'd dial the number, wait for the screech to come through the handset, slam the handset into the modem's acoustic coupler, and ... magic happened.

On the internet, nobody knows you're a dog. But on BBSs, they sure knew you were a kid—the more so the more you tried to hide it. Not that many of the adults were much more mature, but I digress.

See, kids do kid things. In my case, as the abovementioned 14-year-old SOF-reading cadet, it was the signature I appended to every post: "Dan the Merc."

There. That's a thing you know now.

Can you imagine anything cooler? Anything tougher? Anything more ABSOLUTELY BADASS? Wait, don't answer that. You in the back, stop snickering.

Relax. Kids grow up.

@ChemBob I believe it! Really I think all scientific programming suffers from the "I don't want it good, I want it Tuesday" problem.

There are two philosophies in #programming toward handling questionable #data. The first is to check the #integrity of the data every time it's used. This takes a fair amount of #programmer time, and depending on the size of the data may also take a fair amount of #computer time. It's a PITA to write, test, debug, and run.

The second is to say "I've already checked this data a bunch of times in the program, it's fine" and skip the integrity checks after the first time. In #scientific programming, this is particularly tempting: the data sets are huge, and writing checks is annoying. The whole thing feels like a waste of time when you're reasonably sure your code will never run on anything except this particular data set which you already see more of than your family and your pets and you just want to get the damned thing done.

About 95% of the time, I take the first approach. Every time I do it, I'm grumbling to myself. Just finish it, already! And I am uneasily aware that those who take the second approach get their work done faster than I do.

Yes. This is true.

They also get a lot of #garbage results—many of which don't look like garbage at all. Here comes the ritual chest-thumping ... in #bioinformatics, and #biomedical #research generally, those mistakes don't just lead to flawed publications, as bad as that is. Garbage results kill people.

I just received a lesson in why the first is a really good idea. Let's be careful out there.

@retiredskigod They really should have thought harder about the implications of making "woke" their go-to insult. But that would require thinking, so.

I have been criticized in the past for repeating the observation—not original to me—that the entire #Republican platform depends on persuading people to #vote against their own #interests.

This is #patronizing, I'm told. I just don't understand what their interests *are*. Get out of that #urban #liberal #bubble! Who the hell do you think you are, anyway, telling other people what they need?

Well, here it is, in the starkest possible terms. Republicans are willing and indeed eager to #suffer, as long as they think people they #hate are suffering more. There is no other explanation. None.

https://www.axios.com/2023/04/21/poll-republican-voters-trump-desantis-2024

Some answers just write themselves.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-differences-between-a-vampire-and-an-ordinary-person-How-can-we-identify-a-vampire-in-reality-without-its-presence-in-humans/answer/Daniel-Dvorkin-3

There are no surprises here: #conservatives have long ago learned to redefine #liberal language to their advantage. Calling out #racism is racism itself, in their eyes. #Diversity, #equity, and #inclusion somehow become totalitarian in their world, even though the entire concept of #DEI would be considered anathema by any totalitarian government in history. And, of course, anything *at all* they don't like is #woke.

No, no surprises. But still well worth reading, because we can never forget for a moment what our enemies are.