DeVault is the absolute shit-piss-scum of FOSS, and yet his insane website is still allowed on Hackernews where mine is shadowbanned. They actively defend the revelations of him being a loliphile oh HN by flagging and deleting any posts about it.
The vile narcissistic piece of shit calling out anybody at this point is just rich. He's calling out the spec in people's eyes while his eyes are infected with glaucoma. The bastard needs to just shut the fuck up. Touching grass will not help him. He is a vile degenerate who even Luke Skywalker could not save. There is no good left in him.
@phnt i see drew is trying to make the nazi insinuation without committing to making the nazi insinuation, based purely on everyone who ever makes a pose with their hand pointed upward must be bellamy saluting hitler.
@sun@phnt@sam potentially illegal in france (lol) the EU has opinions about making public hit lists. you'd think he'd know this considering he's an EU simp :gutkato_konfuzita:
@sam@phnt he is actually kind of weird and the appelbaum support thing is personally distasteful but he's also smarter and more right than everyone on cryptography. the concept of this list is weird for a lot of reasons, in part because of course the guy making the list is trying to get all these people isolated and destroyed (but not HARASSED)
@phnt I'm pretty sure the reason why is partially because djb has a recent reputation for calling everyone who disagrees with his opinions an employee of the NSA
@newt@phnt@sam@sun i knew someone who liked him despite the hard scuff, though i don't talk to them.
the ultimate hipocracy is when drew got blacklisted for admitting to ever having a bad thought about programmer socks, and then whined that he was receiving his own prescribed treatment :hehe:
they really should teach rauls veil of ignorance to more of these people.
@newt@phnt@sam@sun this is part of where these days i point out hard the importance of the right to be wrong, and poppers original message about it.
the right to be wrong is holding an opinion or doing a behavior that is not provably good. this is important because the amount of scope does not always exist to know if your behavior is good. there are many times that behavior seems like it could go either way until data comes out that informs this. sometimes, even, that data turns out to be motivated reasoning and more data shows that its actually wrong afterall. nature likes this one since genes practice disagreeing on what is optimal by continuing to try things that might not be, and the monocultures get wiped out by diseases that are able to exploit them. this enforced variance ensures a disease cannot ever wipe out all of humanity, because *someone* will have had a mutation that broke whatever assumption the disease exploits.
popper just puts that boundary at "you have the right to be wrong so long as you're just talking about being wrong," it pre-forecloses both the hitlerian and communist revolutionaries that aren't making risky statements and are just blundering straight to hard violence.
rauls veil of ignorance argues that if you design a system with full knowledge that your place will just be a random draw, you will be faced with how bad of an idea it is to design your ideals as extremism (you could, yourself, fall in to the "had one wrong opinion" condition, then be summarily executed as that's basically what most of these people are trying to argue without saying.)
@grillchen@phnt@sun modern audience liberals are incredibly bad at logic and reason which is funny because those are kind of cornerstones of liberalism
what bothers me is i agree with him like 80-90%. 10-20% i think his case isnt bullet proof enough to make a public hit list or mention people. like you cant just sprinkle in a name like louis rossmann. either u are specific or you dont. to much "by association" and rumors or "1 person claimed" makes this whole thing not trustworthy and not support worthy
also if we are full woke, than lets be full woke and remove the "little". u cannot make a left hitlist with ableism.
@grillchen@phnt@sun a lot of at least classical liberalism falls out of "it turns out pitchfork mobs can be riled up by charismatic people and, compared to evidence, tend to just kill weirdos more than predators" but this requires actually going through the whole observation to theory to testing cycle
which is the exact process that refuses "some anonymous sources alleged" as credible. if "was near" and "someone said" are valid, then drew is a pedophile full stop. the defenses about that basically involve arguing "well the allegations were weak because its just clips of old forum posts" but that's clearly not the standard.
nicco does a much better job shitting on DHH by actually pointing out his persistent trump posting and weirdly specific citation sources.