Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)D

Decompose

@ Decompose @programming.dev

Posts
1
Comments
138
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump
  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • A livid Donald Trump rants against judge hearing his New York fraud case

    Jump

  • Proper court filings showing that the judge took that decision based on the lawyer actively waiving it.

    Though I have to warn you that I've seen the filings before. Good luck with that. But in good faith, I'm still open to being wrong. Show me that then I'll definitely change my mind.

  • A livid Donald Trump rants against judge hearing his New York fraud case

    Jump

  • Lol... you expect me to believe that random website? You're kidding, right?

    Spare me the bullshit.

    Teenager, it's.

  • Deleted

    Permanently Deleted

    Jump

  • A livid Donald Trump rants against judge hearing his New York fraud case

    Jump

  • Yes, of course... because we know that SF is all about making food.

    I guess we'll see.

  • A livid Donald Trump rants against judge hearing his New York fraud case

    Jump

  • The lawyer didn't waive shit. Don't make stuff up.

  • A livid Donald Trump rants against judge hearing his New York fraud case

    Jump

  • Your brain is a teenager's brain if you're really not lying. You probably believe CNN, don't you?

    I read, but Trump, regardless of how much you hate him, has the right to have a jury of his peers + full trial with witnesses on the matter. Especially on a matter that's really controversial. This is corruption attempted to destroy him, nothing else. I'm not stupid to believe any of this is done in good faith.

  • A livid Donald Trump rants against judge hearing his New York fraud case

    Jump

  • A summary judgment isn't a trial. You can pull this bs on your fellow teenagers, not on adults.

    "This is all legit" doesn't cut it. The judge can't make a decision without a lawyer defending his case. This is your kind of bullshit. The teenager kind.

  • A livid Donald Trump rants against judge hearing his New York fraud case

    Jump

  • A livid Donald Trump rants against judge hearing his New York fraud case

    Jump

  • Nice barking. Now back to your cage.

    Dogs bark, and the people continue their lives.

  • A livid Donald Trump rants against judge hearing his New York fraud case

    Jump

  • I don't care, and I'm not here to argue your worthless opinion. There MUST be a trial, because that's everyone's right. No one is above the law... well, except for the corrupt establishment that finds ways around law.

  • A livid Donald Trump rants against judge hearing his New York fraud case

    Jump

  • The judge is corrupt. A summary judgment was made without trial. This is just wrong.

    The corrupt establishment is doing everything it can to stop Trump. Hilarious!

  • Why do you use Linux?

    Jump

  • I use it for my servers and for remotely programming for over a decade. Using it on a desktop setup for work or games? Fuck no!

    It's my criticism of the Linux community: They don't understand what "being productive" really means. I need to do work during the day, and produce results. I don't have time to deal with my docking station not working, monitors settings breaking, and tinker with them every day... not because I can't, but because I SHOULDN'T NEED TO.

    It was cool when I was a teenager... now I need to make money.

    As frustrating as it sounds. On windows and mac, literally plug and play. Every time I get the exact same setup. On Linux... dear Lord... every day a different problem and a different tinker until I swore that I'm done, and went back to remote use of Linux. Linux terminal is perfect, and that's probably all I'll need. Linux desktop through VNC, if ever.

  • fair share?

    Jump

  • You're such an idiot you didn't even understand what I did. I did a non-linear fit of the inverse law, not just a plot. But you're ignorant so you can't understand what that even means. Fuck off and read a book.

    Calculus? Dude I have a PhD in physics. Calculus is children's play. But anyway, I think it's time to block you.

  • fair share?

    Jump

  • Dude, don't tell me "you know" what Zipf law is when you questioned that whole inverse-law thing. Just shut up! Not only I shut you up by bringing it up, but I also did the math for you a fit a function for you to prove you wrong, which you, of course, won't do because you're lazy, assuming you even know how to fit data to a function. And now we're changing the goal post so that you can be right. Make a plan that's realistic, that doesn't involve taxation as it's done now maximized for the middle class, or fuck off and read a book! I've heard enough of your nonsense.

  • fair share?

    Jump

  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zipf%27s_law

    "Taxes" are not taken from the richest rich as proposed by this dumb OP's post. That's why you're wrong. What a stupid comment you made!

    So are you gonna shut up now? Go read a book.

    Edit: Because I know you'll start barking anyway, I decided to fit the data of the top 100 billionaires to an inverse function. Now go read a book and learn how nature works.

    Source of the data for 2023 billionaires: https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/

  • fair share?

    Jump

  • Make a better calculation then come back, and stop criticizing examples. If you understand statistics, you'll see why whether 25 or 50 billionaires doesn't make much of a difference. They all mostly follow inverse function distribution in wealth. There's a law for it, forgot the name. So, no matter what amount you scrape from the top, it won't make a difference.

    Again, ignorance in real world phenomenon and attempts to talk policy. Please stop! Read a book!