The most encouraging thing in the whole talk for me was when he told a roomful of IT folks that they need to join or form Unions and they cheered.

Not true.

He can’t prevent anyone that received the code under the GPL from using (and distributing it) under the old license. He also can’t relicense code that he received under the GPL only under the new license.

If he receives a new license from the other contributors to distribute under a more restrictive license, he can do that because he has a dual license to the code and is not relying on the GPL for his right to distribute.

Oh See Paren Left Brace Whatmark

For loads of alternatives, see the Jargon File

Gonna have to disagree with #3 - stopping Vim is not necessary for this. There’s the builtin :! command.

not being released until next year.

Don’t forget /auto, for things that get automatically mounted when you first access them (autofs)

Slow down there - you’re making some rather large assumptions about why they have guns. Sure, some people have guns for “self defense” (some for valid reasons, others because racism). Others have them for hunting. Sometimes they’re inherited and have sentimental value.

Edit: Also, kids aren’t the only reason not to keep them loaded. Keeping guns and ammo separately secured introduces enough of a delay to reduce the risk of suicide, for example.

Not a choice he had to make. The NFP parties agreed on a consensus candidate - Lucie Castets.

Pornography is close to full sex work

FTFY

That would be true for competent web developers. Unfortunately, those are a vanishingly small subset.

Nah. This has happened with every major corporate antivirus product. Multiple times. And the top IT people advising on purchasing decisions know this.

Florida.

No need to - “gay bashing” is unambiguous and hasn’t been used for decades to describe criticism of gay gangs that go around clubbing trans people to death.

Acknowledging that Zionists have robbed the word “antisemitic” of its meaning is the first step in reclaiming the word. The second step is to use other words to describe actual antisemitism so that people understand it still exists. The third is to refuse to allow Zionists to continue conflating anti-Zionism with antisemitism.

You asked how to describe it, and I engaged with you in good faith to provide an answer. You responded with a second rhetorical device, and I engaged for the benefit of other readers. I won’t bother a third time.

[Edit: I removed the last paragraph after initially posting, being unsure I was responding to the same user in both cases. When I re-added it after confirming, I used slightly different language. Their quote of “rhetorical trick” below matches the original wording, and is a legitimate quote of my response]

A hate crime.

Because we don’t. The old name was “Sex Reassignment Surgery” (SRS), but the new names are “Gender Affirming Surgery” and “Gender Confirmation Surgery”.

Favorite would be a highly customized zsh.

fizsh (not fish) is what I actually end up using, as I can’t be bothered to copy that config around and retune it for each machine. Gives me the syntactic sugar of zsh with common default options on by default, an OK default prompt, and doesn’t break POSIX assumptions like fish. Also Installs quickly from the package manager without needing to run through the zsh setup each time - unlike oh-my-zsh. And if I still need customization, all the zsh options are still there.

No - it was the language that I said was transphobic, not the author. Given that there were two different word choices (“transsexual” and “perceived gender”) that reinforced each other, it seems more likely than not that they reflected the mindset of the author, but not having looked further for their other writings I was not sure. That’s why I said " transphobic language" and not “transphobic author”.

More, but there’s an even simpler solution. In the context, the author is distinguishing between “sex assigned at birth” and “perceived gender.” The equivocating word " perceived" could simply be dropped with no loss of clarity.

There’s nothing wrong with the example in and of itself, but the word “transsexual” in place of “transgender” is not generally random. It is explicitly chosen by Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists (TERFs) as well as by right-wing transphobes as a dog whistle to conflate gender dysphoria with drag queens and cross-dess fetishists so as to delegitimise transpeople and suggest some sort of sexual deviance. Coupled with the equivocation of “perceived” gender, motive doesn’t even have to come into it. The words themselves and the concepts they reinforce are transphobic and harmful.

A witch hunt would have been for me to say that the author is a transphobic asshole whose writings need to be wiped from the internet - which is very far from what I actually posted, which was regret for the way the language they chose distracted from the flow of their argument by reinforcing the social stigmatization of trans people. (Edit: That was a deliberate choice on my part. Not knowing enough about the author to be sure of motives and having no desire to deep dive into their history, I decided that it was only appropriate to point out the hurtful nature of the language and not imply motive.)

A well argued point. Could have done without the random transphobic comments about “transsexuals” and “perceived gender”.