I think you're underestimating the extent to which they really want these things, or their donors do. These issues aren't new, and many of them either trace back to before the founding of the country, or are proxies for other issues which do. They're just feeling bold these days.
docAvid
Exactly. Dependency injection is good; if you need a framework to do it, you're probably doing it wrong; if your framework is too magical, you're probably not even doing it at all anymore.
Private ownership of capital altogether, but yeah.
Pretty sure they meant to not have review. Dropping peer review in favor of pair programming is a trendy idea these days. Heh, you might call it "pairs over peers". I don't agree with it, though. Pair programming is great, but two people, heads together, can easily get on a wavelength and miss the same things. It's always valuable to have people who have never seen the new changes take a look. Also, peer review helps keep the whole team up to date on their knowledge of the code base, a seriously underrated benefit. But I will concede that trading peer review for pair programming is less wrong than giving up version control. Still wrong, but a lot less wrong.
Or gets promoted, and keeps moving on to new and bigger projects, leaving a trail of destruction, because all management sees is they close tickets faster than the people who are busy picking up the pieces behind them.
Emacs Magit is so much better than the CLI, and I don't say that lightly. And it's available on Linux.
I barely know Vim, I'm an Emacs guy. Every time I pair with a colleague using an IDE, I find myself having to exercise great restraint, and not complain about how slow and fussy everything they do is. When I've worked with skilled vimmers, I have to admit that they invoke the deep magic nearly as efficiently as I do. Hotkeys? Pshaw, child's play.
Yes, I completely agree, so far as I can without looking up your post and comment history to confirm that you do what you are saying here you do, but taking your word for that. Good faith criticism isn't what Pan_Ziemniak seemed to be describing.
Two things can be happening. People with a legitimate moral concern, such as myself, don't actively act against that concern by helping elect a candidate who would make that concern even worse. There are ways to express our anger and sorrow about Biden's handling of this without supporting Trump.
I would prefer to say "all publicly traded corporations are effectively amoral, and capable of any imaginable evil, if it is in their interests. It's just a question of when their interests will align with an evil action."
Private ownership of capital is antisocial and antidemocratic. Owner-operated private businesses, the classic "Mom and Pop" store, are still antidemocratic, but much more distinctive in character, and may be more pro-social. Worker-owned cooperatives are significantly better altogether.
That's a lotta high fives!
Characterizing the voters as "lazy" is really failing to understand how bad legislators stay in office. We need to reform our electoral systems to make legislators more accountable to democratic oversight, not impose arbitrary limits that take the power away from the voters.
With term limits, the Congress would lose institutional knowledge. When a new member of Congress came in, they would only have lobbyists to give them introductions, teach them the ropes. Legislation is a difficult job that requires professionals, not just a bunch of newbies. We would be absolutely signing over the Congress to complete corporate control.
More democracy is better.
Less democracy is worse.