IM DA JOKER BABY
As a heads up in advance, we have an intermediate protection ready in case the site goes down again due to extremely high traffic, like it did for Roe v Wade. (We are also working on infrastructure and performance improvements in the meantime, but I'm the actual worst, so...) If that does go into effect, you'll see the following:
- posts will only be visible to logged in users
- your upbears will still work (number will change), but they won't stay highlighted yellow.
So... uh... no need to panic. (IF that even happens)
Sorry for sharing an uneducated opinion but would it help/be possible to disable the real time page updates, and only update upon URL change or refresh? That's gotta be pinging the site all the time from every tab right?
It also sometimes makes my open threads suddenly disappear so I wouldnt miss it
I’m convinced it’s intentional in order to make us touch grass whenever it becomes annoying enough… almost at least.
I appreciate the suggestion. I think that's something that's been discussed before. while I'm not as much of a front-end dev, I've been told that the site's usage of websockets makes this not as bad? don't want to out any of the other devs, but maybe someone else can chime in if they feel comfortable doing so.
Can confirm. The bottlenecks that happen when the site gets high traffic are in the database. New websocket messages happen in response to post and comment creation, which are relatively lightweight operations with a small payload.
So live updates have consistently been an issue that needs to be resolved on the frontend, but making that fix would not stop the site from getting overloaded
Hey, just wanted to ask who the right people to contact are regarding getting a better understanding of the various service interactions and deployment-related stuff for the site.
I'm on the analytics side of database operations (so a slightly difference space than the needs of an API interacting with the DB layer- but still familiar with Postgres which I assume is what is being used since this is a lemmy fork), but I'd still like to get an understanding of how the site's services interact to see if I can potentially find any performance gains that might alleviate some of this stress a bit.
Edit- nevermind. Found resources on the pinned c/technology thread and am looking into them now.
Thank you and the team for all your hard work, I've been too angry to touch most other sites in the last week. :fidel-salute:
I just want to say good luck, and we're all counting on you.
Hi! Thanks for all your hard work!
If I had a certain set of web skills, how would I go about helping you all out?
So there it is, laid out plain and clear for the libs: the continuation of this system and the survival of human civilization are now in total conflict; only one of the two can possibly happen now.
They'll still insist on a :vote:-based solution, sure. But what happens when they get slaughtered in November? Will they finally wake the fuck up, or will they just mope at brunch? Stay tuned, folks.
There's some people that realize the problem, but reading through the reddit thread on Brandon saying he's okay with an exception to the filibuster to codify Roe v. Wade, there's a bunch of people screaming that we need to vote, that if we touch the filibuster, Republicans will do worse, and that there's nothing we can really do because of a constitutional crisis should Congress pass a law directly at odds against the Supreme Court, but also don't think about gerrymandering. I don't see these people still violently against anything other than voting to ever wake up. I mean for God's sake they think they'll get Collins and Murkowski to defect to counter Manchin and Sinema.
that if we touch the filibuster, Republicans will do worse
This is a fucking baby brained take. The Dems basically never used the filibuster when Trump was in office because they know full well if they use it the Republicans have no problem just ignoring it. It’s a rule that only applies to democrats.
he Dems basically never used the filibuster when Trump was in office because they know full well if they use it the Republicans have no problem just ignoring it. It’s a rule that only applies to democrats.
They did. The biggest bill the was passed under Trump was the 2017 tax cuts which passed under budget reconciliation ( the way you can avoid the filibuster once per year). The filibuster definitely limited what the Trump govt could do (till Dems won the House)
The difference is that Republicans can advance their goals with the Federalist Society people on the Supreme Court (as we are seeing) so they benefit more from the filibuster being in place.
Libs still can't seem to get that the Republicans/conservatives/fascists are totally willing to kill the hostages they take.
For a whole two days /r/ politics has no posts about trump. Now they are back at it. I don't think go vote posters are organic
Republicans will do worse,
Has someone pointed out to them that conservatives will ALWAYS do the worst regardless?
The Supreme Court could rule that it's illegal to vote for non-Republicans, and the libs would STILL say the only solution is to :vote:
They’ll still insist on a :vote:
Supreme court just took up a voting laws case for next term :capitalist-laugh:
Steve Vladeck @steve_vladeck #BREAKING: #SCOTUS grants certiorari in Moore v. Harper; will decide next Term whether state legislatures can override state courts on questions of state law where federal elections are concerned (the "independent state legislature doctrine"):
https://supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/063022zor_5he6.pdf
OK, but what are the specifics of this case? Is this case seeing if states are allowed to ignore election results, like quite a lot of Republicans want to do?
They’ll still insist on a -based solution, sure. But what happens when they get slaughtered in November? Will they finally wake the fuck up, or will they just mope at brunch?
I was talking with some of my lib friends about this who are struggling to come to terms with the reality of it....but in my anecdotal experience they're kinda getting it. If they do wake up though, the problem we'll have to deal with is that this is going to require things getting to the point where people are willing to literally throw their bodies in front of this to try and stop this thing.
I don't blame them for being terrified and not wanting to. I'm on the wrong side of 35 so I don't harbor illusions about being solid snake under the right circumstances anymore like every idiot dude thinks he would be given the chance.
My work chat actually included the phrase "violent revolution" today, and not from me. In a public forum. I think some folks are actually getting fed up maybe. It's probably just :copium:
I thought I'd find a 538 article telling Dems it was still safe to brunch but I guess that wouldn't be the case. I was almost certain 2022 would hold steady and 2024 would be when they jerk the wheel right, but I guess were going to veer into it first.
three years ago i held up a sign at a protest that said socialism or barbarism
well... barbarism it is folks!
:agony-deep: :agony-deep: :agony-deep: :agony-deep: :agony-deep: :agony-deep: :agony-deep: :agony-deep: :agony-deep: :agony-deep: :agony-deep: :agony-deep:
Not such a bad thing, as long as we're the ones being barbarous
I'm already planning to wage gorillla warfare on the federalist society. Me and my mates are storming the place completely nude, armed and dangerous while blasted on lsd :spongebob-party: :spongebob-party: :spongebob-party:
to any federal agents reading: this is not a parody i am a danger to society and good luck i'm behind 69 proxies behind the dumpster of a mcdonalds using their wifi where i craft all of my posts
Me and my mates are storming the place completely nude, armed and dangerous while blasted on lsd
Isn’t that the plot to that amazon movie Get Duked?
This is even more clear cut than Roe that it would be incredibly simple for the Democrats to fix this with legislation, so of course you can count on them doing absolutely nothing and pretending Joe Manchin is the only dem in the pocket of big coal.
This is even more clear cut than Roe that it would be incredibly simple for the Democrats to fix this with legislation,
How so?
the decision just says the EPA can't define stuff w/o congress, no? so congress just needs to pass a law with the same rules. dems are in power it should be as simple as pie lmao
but i think they'll lay this one on the altar of "things we cant do anything about because someone we can override said no"
but i think they’ll lay this one on the altar of “things we cant do anything about because someone we can override said no”
The Parliamentarian (who serves COMPLETELY at the discretion of just the Senate Majority Leader and can be unilaterally replaced by them) sends their regards
Yes, basically this. The argument for was based on the clean air act as the source of this power of the EPA to regulate emissions. Just need to pass a law basically explicitly giving the EPA that power.
Basically says agencies like the EPA can't make their own rules, that responsibility/power lies with the legislature. The "rulemaking power" can't be delegated, essentially.
What do you think was the flash point in Germany when people realized that the descent into fascism had already happened? I thought America’s decline into fascism would be gradual because of how powerful it is, but in just one week we’ve regressed on 100 years of liberal reforms. I knew we were frogs being boiled alive, but it’s like they said fuck the water and threw us straight into fry oil.
I think it has been gradual. Hence "the worst day in America history, only to be beaten by every subsequent day in American history" or whatever. There has been shocking event after shocking event for decades.
-
Hitler being appointed chancellor
-
April 1st, '33 boycott of Jewish businesses
-
Nuremberg laws
-
Kristallnacht
-
"But the one great shocking occasion, when tens or hundreds or thousands will join with you, never comes. That’s the difficulty. If the last and worst act of the whole regime had come immediately after the first and smallest, thousands, yes, millions would have been sufficiently shocked—if, let us say, the gassing of the Jews in ’43 had come immediately after the ‘German Firm’ stickers on the windows of non-Jewish shops in ’33. But of course this isn’t the way it happens. In between come all the hundreds of little steps, some of them imperceptible, each of them preparing you not to be shocked by the next. Step C is not so much worse than Step B, and, if you did not make a stand at Step B, why should you at Step C? And so on to Step D.
Lib shit, but the point is there never will be one shining moment. We are in the interceding steps heading towards the abyss; hell, maybe we're already in it
Supreme Court had shit out at least three of these in a week so who knows?
:astronaut-1:
Destruction of corporate property isn't terrorism though.
I have a material interest in anticipating what the US government will interpret as such
You shouldn't accept and use their framing any more than you do the framing of forced birth activists.
Rejecting the judges definition of violence as they throw me into the despair pit
I’m not accepting and using their framing by anticipating what will and won’t get me kidnapped and caged by pigs
You are though. Nobody is saying sabotaging industry isn't highly illegal, only that you shouldn't further the conflation of that with terrorism.
I’m really not. Being aware of how your oppressor views the world is not the opposite of fighting oppression. It’s a necessary prerequisite. If I go to a protest in black bloc and leave my phone behind, I’m not accepting the 🐷 framing that leftist protesters are violent and therefore deserving of being tracked down and harassed via mass surveillance. I’m doing my best to protect myself from their predictable reaction to me challenging their power.
If you really wanna dig in on this, are you saying that industrial sabotage is not terrorism because it’s destruction of property rather than doing harm to people? Or are you saying that by calling sabotage terrorism I’m conflating ecological freedom fighting with Nazi mass shooters or something? Because I’m not the one doing that conflation. The US government is.
:shrug-outta-hecks: As long as you understand it'll be labeled terrorism on every tv in the country
Terrorism is useless without a party attached to it (but separate enough for plausible deniability) that can come out and explain to the public why these acts are being done. Terrorism for its own sake will only lead to further repression.
There's a difference between terrorism to make a political point and sabotage to disable critical infrastructure, which I think is what most people really mean when they say "eco terrorism". Make it too difficult and expensive to operate as-is.
Yeah that's fair, but I do think it's possible that even sabotage could end up running counter to what we're trying to do without a vanguard party to explain the actions. Say you destroy a pipeline, yes that shuts the pipeline down for x amount of time, but when gas prices go up and there's no public explanation as to the motives, I feel that would simply be a temporary inconvenience for the capitalist class while setting back the cause for the masses.
Considering you would really need a mass movement to cripple infrastructure long-term, I think it's more helpful to continue building in ways that may still be dubiously legal but have more chance to really build a mass movement i.e. the many indigenous groups fighting to protect their land from pipelines.
Well... that's really just it then, huh? Without serious revolutionary action, which can still happen, the Earth is just fucked
It's not exactly ideal, but I suspect the global South will use aerosols to cool the planet down. The subsequent consequences of that are unknown. I wouldn't be surprised to see that, in turn, taken too far.
global souths gonna plant trees and bill gates is gonna spray aerosols over them and kill the new forests with acidrain & artificial shade
plant trees
Current climate models almost always assume negative emissions. The best technology we currently posses to do that, is, like you said, planting trees. If all nations keep the promises they made in the Paris agreement, we still need to plant a forest the size of two to three times India to keep us below 1.5°C warming.
They made a documentary about that, I think it's called Snowpiercer
the earth is gonna be fine in the long run, it's human beings who are gonna be fucked.
Almost all animal and plant life on earth will also be fucked. But yeah at least the rocks and dirt will still be there.
No wonder the anglos are so keen on climate change, they're the only ones who'll make it
This is like using new babies as an excuse for murder. Ecocide is not justifiable because in millions of years life may evolve again.
This is Reddit (tm) pedantic nihilism and it’s gross
I didn't say ecocide is justifiable. I said life would come back.
The end of most species is still bad though
That’s definitely the implication when you pedantically correct people who warn against catastrophic global ecological destruction with “eh the earth will be fine”. It’s a very common Redditism, as it combines pedantry with nihilism, anti-humanism and consumerism.
My apologies I don't think there are any positives to the coming ecological destruction
Eh I’m sure you didn’t mean anything by it, it’s just an annoying Reddit trope. You made it in jest as dark humor it seems, but there are people out there who literally use these arguments to not care about the “doom speaking alarmists” who warn about what is coming and continue their inaction
I agree with you and am not consoled either. I was just saying what I think will happen (mushroom people)
Animal & plant life have ironically been through more bullshit than we've thrown at them & bounced back before. You gotta remember that something like 90% of all biodiversity that has ever existed on the planet went extinct before humans even existed as a species.
Cool. I don't want one of those mass extinctions to happen in a few short generations for the most pointless reasons imaginable.
a ruling that will impact the federal government's authority to regulate in other areas of climate policy, as well as regulation of the internet and worker safety.
fucking speed running fascism
I knew it was coming and yet it still ruined my day.
If there aren't at least mass protests by July 4th, that's it, this country is doomed. Libs can't even bother to go out kicking and screaming. :joker-troll:
Since when have libs ever gone out kicking and screaming? They’re gonna go out licking and sucking :so-true: :bootlicker:
:volcel-judge: "STOP RIGHT THERE, SUCC DEM!" :liberalism: :pingu-horny:
Lol eco terrorism is going to make a big come back then, but I guess more violence is the goal at this point
I LOVE THE WEATHER UNDERGROUND. I LOVE THE WEATHER UNDERGROUND. I LOVE THE WEATHER UNDERGROUND.
I'm just so tired. So, so tired...but I'm also old, and revolutions are for young people, right?
If you're old, you've already enjoyed the fruits of youth. You must fertilize the soil for those whose growth is being stolen
If you’re alive, you’re gonna feel it whether you’re on the front lines or not. You may not be a foot soldier, but you can be auxiliary or underground
People were speculating that this ruling would remove the federal government's ability to enforce regulatory rules made by any federal agency. EPA, SEC, FAA, and that this would deligitimize the supreme court because the government was not likely to abide the ruling and many agencies were planning to ignore the ruling.
Is that still gonna happen?
My guess is that it will take at least one more court case, which will now be able to use this as precedent. Neat, huh?
I mean, what's stopping them from ignoring the court? The court doesn't have an army backing it up (and the Pentagon already has released statements opposing them), or a police force. It's all on paper, no?
It's actually a much more restrained ruling than people were expecting, and I would bet it's for exactly that reason.
read this from reason. com, which breaks it down fine. Obviously they think bad things are good but for describing the technical what-happened, it does that fine.
It dealt more with the correct statutory reading of the clean air act than with the constitutional nondelegation, which is what we were scared about, which is still going to come up at some point.
and tbh I think the decision is bad for consequentialist reasons, not because the reasoning is bad. Although when I read the dissent, I find myself agreeing with that too. I agree with whatever I read last :/
:shinji-screm: IT ALL GOES TUMBLING DOWN
TUMBLING DOWN
TUMBLING DO-OWN
IT ALL EETURNS TI NOTHING
IT JUST KEEPS LETTING ME DOWN
LETTING ME DOWN
LETTING ME DOWN :shinji-impact:
SO WITH SADNESS IN MY HEART
FEEL THE BEST THING I COULD DO
IS END IT ALL AND LEAVE FOREVER
WHAT'S DONE IS DONE, IT FEELS SO BAD
WHAT ONCE WAS HAPPY NOW IS SAD
I'LL NEVER LOVE AGAIN
MY WORLD IS ENDING
:shinji-impact:
