Other countries have them as well but the US has the most pervasive one.

Your credit score is based on the history of accounts and payments. If you have late payments it goes down. If you have many accounts for a long time in good standing it is goes up. A person who has many accounts and has paid off everything for 15 years might have a score of 800. Someone who has missed credit card payments and has things in collections might have a 550.

When you go to get a loan for a house or car the high credit score person might be given a 5% loan and the low credit score person no loan or a very poor rate sometimes over 20%. It can take years to change your credit score.

Every system is racist because every system is human and humans are flawed. Credit scores include systemic racism and banks making calls based on their gut is direct practiced racism. Systemic racism is much easier to slowly over time work out as long as you recognize it. But the only way to stop direct racism is to take at least some of the power away from individuals.

The systemic racism like the structural one in the argument can only be gotten rid of if you entirely removed the concepts of loans. The problem with that is it is impossible. The majority of the folks who have attempted to outlaw usury and loans entirely are not really looked back upon fondly in a historical sense.

There is also the legality of it and if it is treasonous. The one person at least the senators have some saftey nets from the Supreme Court but they still are at risk here.

The world doesn’t work better if people help those closest to them. The majority of the strife in the world exists because people help those close to them and treat others as outsiders. You can look at any system ever used and the point of failure is always someone tipping the scales intentionally to favor those near them.

Do people want to go back to the system that was used before credit scores? Where the person serving the loan just made the choice based off if they thought you seemed trustworthy? Aka were a white man who went to the same church as them.

I get it, but we should as a community try to be better than that.

AI won’t fail. It already is past the point where failing or being a fad was an option. Even if we wanted to go backwards, the steps that were taken to get us to where we are with AI have burned the bridges. We won’t get 2014 quality search engines back. We can’t unshitify the internet.

That AI is the one you make or at least host. No one is going to host an online AI for you that is 100% ethical because that isnt profitable and it is very expensive.

When you vilianize AI you normalize AI use as being bad. The end result is not people stopping use of AI it is people being more okay with using less ethical AI. You can see this with folks driving SUVs and big trucks. They intentionally pick awful choices because the fatigue of being wrong for driving a car makes them just accept that it doesn’t matter.

It feels dumb, it is dumb, but is what happens.

Nestle bottling water is bad, so my solution will be to never drink any water and make fun of people who do. This is how it always comes off to me.

I use far far less if I use a very small amount twice rather than a lot once. The shampoo will mix with oils in your hair and when you wash once you just keep rubbing the oil and detergent mix back onto yourself. Using a small amount and rinsing it off will make it function far better.

Sometimes I do. We have great healthcare. Can send a couple pics of a scrape like that and they note it incase anything happens which pretty much is never. And we can count the topical we buy or have delivered against the deductible.

It helps get the system down pat and shows our kid how to use it incase they have bigger questions for their doctor later or need to take care of a more serious problem without us.

The only people who progressives lose to are the Democrats. Even in cases where they win a primary they get kneecapped by the DNC. Most US progressives come in with wild ideas like making the rich pay things instead of poor people. Making sure water is clean. Keeping the government out of our bedrooms. Governing rather than blustering. They also tend to be relatable as most have worked at least one real job in their life.

Who in the world eats hard shell tacos?

I hearby ask you to fight whatever battles you want, as long as you’re not a dick to anyone about it. Hopefully this frees up any confusion.

Everyone should see a therapist. Not every day or even every year but it’s one of the best preventative measures you can have. People bring it up because a lot of folks who struggle with basic emotional health problems don’t see one or feel a stigma around it.

If your therapist sucks or just isnt a good fit for you, you find a new one. Like you would a mechanic, or doctor, or barista.

I believe the rule is any food that is perfect for eating on the road while you drive 45min from your first job, to your second part time night shift job. All of that kind of food doesn’t exist in Europe or at least isn’t popular for some reason.

Why is your hobby more important than their hobby?

Yea but if someone uses those bindings then you can’t just not support it.

By the time this code gets into a large scale production system it will be 2029. That is when the bugs will come in if someone leveraged the Rust bindings.

You can ask the big company users at that time to contribute their fixes upstream, but if they get resistance because they have relatively junior Rust devs trying to push up changes that only a handful of maintainers understand, the company will just stop upstreaming their changes.

The primary concern that a major open source project like this will have is that the major contributors will decide that interacting with it is more trouble than it is worth. That is how open source projects move to being passion projects and then die when the passion dies.

Yea and if the Rust developers don’t show up to the show? Rust is a baby and it has done so little on its own. This isn’t a neat little side project, this is code that a major vendor will want to take up and will demand be maintained. There are implications on a global scale.

It’s mostly in that linked thread. The high level of it is a guy wanted to push Rust code. The maintainer said no it would mean the API for this would be tied to Rust and that is unacceptable. It cause another big contributer to throw a fit and Linus said he can’t be everyone’s mom. They kept fighting for like 2 months apparently? Now Linus stepped in, looked at the code and said the Rust code clearly doesn’t impact the API in the way the maintainer was saying it just breaks itself if the maintainers allow changes to the API.

I kinda dislike the idea that it’s cool for people to contribute code that is so easy to break. I have a feeling after it happens a few times they are going to claim that it is being done intentionally and that the slap fights will carry on.

Linus shouldn’t have to get involved at all. Each part of the Kernel should be handled independently by the maintainers. Linus responding publicly to outside forces is fine but once he has to step in to handle public fights between individuals who are supposed to work together it is a problem.

Linux staying C focused is a valid thing to do. It is very hard to get folks to contribute to the kernel and if you cut out anyone who doesn’t know Rust, a language with at best 5% the adoption rate of C, you will run into spots where sections of the kernel are unmaintained due to no willing and qualified person covering it.

Adding Rust based functionality and support is great. Changing APIs to require maintainers to learn Rust to continue to maintain the code they are experts in is unacceptable.