The design is so much cooler than actual 90s websites were. More like the professional titling for a 90s cyberpunk flick like Hackers which was out 30 years ago next month.
I'm doing web projects during my free time. The website is based around Hugo framework, but since Windows 7 support was dropped i continue to maintain it with custom js/scss
And yeah, love this movie, despite it is a bit childish these days.
We should have something like the federal reserve, but for trade policy. A board of governors nominated and confirmed by the senate in 8 year rotations. Politicians cannot be trusted to craft economic policy. I am dubious that they should be crafting fiscal policy either since theyve shown they cant be trusted with that either
This is power explicitly reserved for Congress, which is being extra-constitutionally seized by the President (on the pretext of "national security") with no public support. The problem here is electing a lawless president and putting the Congress in charge of a GOP which is full of unprincipled cowards from top to bottom, not the institutional framework.
If the answer to a lawless president is a cowardly and corrupt congress, then god help us. Economic policy simply cannot be trusted to politicians whose only incentive is re-election and serving campaign donors
That's true for every aspect of US government and society; having policy set by an elected legislature answerable to the people is how democracy works. If you want things to function better, start electing people who behave honorably and act in good faith and start demanding accountability from your representatives when they don't.
(Also, don't get your hopes up about the Federal Reserve in the current climate. Just like the Supreme Court or the FBI or the EPA or the NIH, the Federal Reserve is only as good as the people in charge, and Trump is doing what he can to seize control and abuse its powers for personal gain.)
The Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which is still current statutory law, empowers the president to set tariffs. There’s an argument that Congress didn’t have the power to pass that law, but they did.
In my understanding, this is only applicable when "an article is being imported into the United States in such quantities or under such circumstances as to threaten or impair the national security". But "national security" is pretextual in this case.
National security is one of the primary motivations for wanting to protect American industry in the first place; it’s hardly pretextual. And even if it was, the law states that whether or not national security is threatened is up to the judgment of the Secretary of Commerce.
In theory, most countries are signatories to the Universal Postal Union and World Customs Organization (branches of the UN) to keep the post/customs system humming along.
I tried to read up on their “rules” on this topic and it’s a bunch of wishy-washy hot air other than some standardization of customs declaration forms, and I guess HS codes.
Otherwise the only way you get everyone to agree on something: by getting them to agree on nothing during their junket meetings.
It wouldn’t matter. The Supreme Court has allowed this administration to do whatever they want within the executive branch with the very narrow exception of messing with the Federal Reserve. And tariffs are squarely under congressional authority, but the party currently controlling congress has decided to cede that power to the president.
Trump's tariffs are already illegal and unconstitutional (though the right-wing Supreme Court won't care). Tariffs are within the purview of Congress. He's been doing all of this through "emergency" declarations.
That is the current system, yes. A president with dubious claims to legitimacy is allowed by a dysfunctional and outdated legislature which abdicated its responsibilities generations ago to yank the chain of the economy at will like a suburban mom walking a Shih Tzu. There are absolutely no checks and balances on the US presidential system other than the now long-dead system of political norms. It's obviously not working well because the absolute fucking moron in charge (or, more realistically, the conservative ghouls which are parading his corpse around, Weekend-at-Bernie's style) is driving our economy straight at a brick wall
The current system was up for debate in the last election.
Feels over reals got us this result where Republicans specifically in Congress refuse to step in to stop the President from violating the emoluments clause, tax authority, and impoundment.
At least the last administration knew they had to pass Congressional legislation to spend money and that impoundment was absolutely illegal. And there is clear evidence Democrats will cull the herd of politicians who stray off.
Tricky to get a list of all cloud providers, all their networks, and then there are cases like CATO Networks Ltd and ZScaler, which are apparently enterprise security products that route clients traffic through their clouds "for security".
Somewhere in season 2 I realized that a huge portion of Cameron was just "say something needlessly hostile or combative, then emphasize it by making your eyes really wide"
She was alright in season 1. She was young and inexperienced and she got too much shit from other people. In season 2/3 she has money and her own company and anytime anyone with more experience than her gives her even the smallest amount of advice she responds like someone is trying to break into her house. Worse, when someone has a good idea that isnt hers, she shuts it down
The point, to me, was that it’s a show about flawed people. Cameron’s flaws were frustrating sometimes, but so were Joe’s, Gordon’s, Donna’s flaws. She was chasing something… (the thing that computers get us to? Connection?) and was constantly worried someone was going to wreck it by taking it in the wrong direction. Like what happened in s01 with the interactive chat based OS she was building.
I dont remember donna having any flaws, shes just surrounded by morons and babies
When donna pointed out how popular chat was, cameron wanted to kill it because it wasnt her idea, even if it was perfectly in line with her vision for what computers could be. To me she's just an arrogant narcissist
What makes you say that? I don't like a lot of things that aren't neoliberalism, is there some trend where people are doing this?
I could make it clearer: Neoliberalism, specifically it's distinguishing trait of having governments foster markets via public money without getting public ownership, leads to concerning situations like the op was discussing.
Edit: Interestingly Trump's thing about getting the government getting a 10% stake in Intel is not neoliberalism! I don't like Trump, but that's still not neoliberalism
Wargroove copied almost everything from advance wars and put it in a fantasy setting, yet it sold much more than most indie games. Copying most values and mechanics from another game wont make a massive hit but it doesn't sell nothing, people who like the mechanics a lot will buy it to play with them some more in a new game.
If you copy a nintendo-platform game which hasnt gotten any love in a long time, put effort into it, and sell it on PC, then yes, you can sell a lot. Harvest Moon hasn't had a good game in over a decade, which is why Stardew Valley was so successful. Similarly, Pokemon has been neglected for generations and there have been a few successful games in the genre, like coromon.
But if you mean copying an already successful PC game with AI Slop assets and putting absolutely no thought into what makes the game good, then you probably should work in a field you actually care about instead
reply