Likely also single.

Brave browser does this. Unfortunately I don't think that they have great adoption.

Last time I asked if they could offer this, they said no. Instead they were pushing their cryptocurrency scam while blocking site owners' advertising.

Doesn't alt right love Russia and especially Putin? How did it get on your "black, Muslim, or an immigrant" shortlist?

Yes, the far-right in North America and Western Europe loves Russia.

Classic case of enemy of my enemy

One of this scenarios would leave me without job, another one would push me to quit my job. Outcome is the same, but bad team is likely to cause a lot of frustration first.

No, one scenario is slightly better because it gives you the choice to quit. In the other scenario there is no choice.

Times constantly change you won't always be in a situation where you have the finances to just quit just because you're frustrated with a job.

As a high paid SWE we often forget that A job is more then doing something you "like" to do, it is a means of survival. When times change, when hard times come or when some life changing event happens, being allowed to survive is a good thing.

It's the same industry where it's common wisdom that you should take a new, better offer every two years and change jobs. Shouldn't come as a shock that sometimes it work the other way.

> Shouldn't come as a shock that sometimes it work the other way.

Isn’t “the other way” the norm on all US companies?

What “the same industry” taught its professionals is that loyalty should not be a one-way deal when corporate dictates that every person can and should be automatically discarded at the drop of a hat, and benefitting from a demand-driven job market is shown to be the only option that employees have to safeguard their livelihood.

I’ve lost count of the number of LinkedIn posts of veterans with >10years in FANGs being summarily fired during the night and only finding out because their access was revoked. This is exactly why people proactively switch jobs. This is the consequence, not the cause. Using these cases to justify labour abuses is victim-blaming.

Huh, now I regret giving SourceHut money. Looks like self-hosting is only sane, judgment-free option.

It's not great, but on a centralised alternative administration will take a side and some groups will be pushed out completely. Unless, of course, such platform will commit to being a public square, but reddit isn't that.

Federation offers at least some hope of cross-pollination.

> tags have the same visual weight as the text they're delimiting

IMO this issue should and can be easily solved by editor/viewer by rendering tags with lower contrast.

Yes, that's a perfectly viable workaround, but it's still a band-aid that requires expending resources that wouldn't need to be spent if the markup method had been better chosen for readability. (To be specific, I believe the angle-brackets are the main culprit.)

> the rules apply to them just the same as anybody else

Wasn't Trump forbidden from blocking people on Twitter by court order?

> "The First Amendment does not permit a public official who utilises a social media account for all manner of official purposes to exclude persons from an otherwise open online dialogue because they expressed views with which the official disagrees," Circuit Judge Barrington Parker wrote, citing several Supreme Court decisions.

That's a good point, as public servants, elected officials should have fewer privileges, not more.

> people who describe themselves as free speech absolutists

Are there actually people like that? Whenever I see this phrase it's used to vaguely describe some group that's obviously in the wrong.

Musk specifically has described himself as one several times. On a less public note, I run into people online describing themselves as such fairly frequently as well