TheHarpyEagle

Ah sorry, I meant using Vim in a GUI program. I wanted something with the flexibility of a mouse (quick navigation, context menu actions, etc.) without using a mouse. Using just the arrow keys, shift highlighting, etc. is just too slow when writing lots of text, and it doesn’t follow the natural position of typing.

I actually use VIM bindings in PyCharm, slightly cursed but actually works really well and meshes fairly nicely with the other IDE shortcuts. Being able to use it in any terminal is a nice bonus.

I honestly learned it just because I hated having to change hand position to use a mouse.

I don’t understand how it fits. They’re not cutting off their relationship to the protective parent (the mother), which is what the new restrictions prohibit. She still has access and custody, but they are also required to attend reunification therapy. Where is the contradiction?

It’s also explained why the abuse investigation does not impact the ordered therapy.

Though the divorce judge found there was evidence that Hawkins had physically abused the oldest son, the judge said in his ruling that was “one instance that does not involve either of the two children at issue.”

The father is only seeking custody of the two youngest sons, who were, as far as the court is aware, not abused by their father. So the judge does not see this or the seven charges of abuse of a minor as relevant in this case.

I’m all for being aware of the quality and reputation of a paper, but it seems you are putting more weight on that then the quality of the article itself. You are pointing at supposed inconsistencies that seem to be explained by the article.

I mean the article explains it pretty clearly.

The new law barred courts from restricting the custody of a parent who is competent, protective and not abusive solely to improve a relationship with the other parent. It prohibits reunification treatment that is predicated on cutting off the relationship between a child and a protective parent the child has a bond with.

Putting aside the insanity of this ever being allowed, it doesn’t apply in this case because custody has not been (officially) cut off. She’s in jail because she objects to the therapist and her methods, believing them to cause severe anxiety in her children, and has thus tried to interfere with the court ordered sessions.

Seriously, the courts are heaping all of this blame on the mother when the kids repeatedly report physical and sexual abuse by their father.

Though the divorce judge found there was evidence that Hawkins had physically abused the oldest son, the judge said in his ruling that was “one instance that does not involve either of the two children at issue.”

Insane. The logic is nonexistent.

The “faith based therapy” thing make everything make a whole lot more sense…

The Wayback Machine shows it was missing at one point.

http://web.archive.org/web/20240829000336/https://discuss.python.org/t/should-we-consider-ranked-choice-voting-for-sc-elections/61880/

Hard to say why exactly it was hidden, but it’s a bad look for sure.

I think that’s a little too simplistic. I definitely agree that “we can’t show you the evidence of why we made this decision but trust us” isn’t going to instill confidence in the community, but it’s not like the steering council is some unrelated board of executives. They’re all core developers, theoretically chosen for their dedication and contributions to Python as a whole, and it seems their granted power has made them anxious about showing favoritism among the most seasoned at the expense of upholding the community guidelines that keep the Python community a positive and welcoming place.

I think a flawed decision was made, or at least the way it was presented was flawed, and that should be considered for the next election. Maybe the council does need to be totally overhauled, that’s a valid position. But this is their work, too, and imply they have no skin in the game is disingenuous.

I avoided it for a while because it felt so clunky, but it has really improved in the last decade.

I was looking around at rental houses a few years back because the owner of our current rental was kicking us out to sell. I visited a house that the owner was “flipping” for rental and noticed there was no stove/oven. I asked the owner about it and he said “oh, tenants usually bring their own.”

Place was sketchy as hell in other areas, too; tons of those cheapo plastic panel walls propped up at odd angles hiding god knows what, bare hardwood floors that had clearly had the carpet ripped up without refinishing or even removing all the staples, and slanted floors that really made me feel like I was about to fall into the basement. Luckily we were able to find another place, but it was a low CoL area and I’m sure some desperate family got stuck in that heap.

Cool, the thing we were assured wouldn’t happen because free market or something.

Even if it’s decided that the EPA has the proper authority, the damage will be done by the time it makes its way through the courts.

The EPA order requires the development of a system specifically designed for PFAS. A similar system is estimated to cost about $25m to develop, or about 0.1% of the air force’s annual budgeting.

Cool cool cool cool cool cool cool…

But they’ll be consistent with the logic that you can’t legally be forced to divulge your medical information… right?

To be fair, the tech job market is in a pretty shit position right now. For many people it’s not possible to leave their current job, even if they hate it (ask me how I know).

I dunno, five different women with very different stories really doesn’t look good.

NPR’s Serial series had a great season about Gitmo. The last two episodes in particular discuss why this case has been drawn out so long. They also talk with a group of family members of victims who support the plea deal if only to get some closure via official statements from the detainees.

You can certainly keep the original comment, just with an addendum. Of course you don’t have to, but it could prevent further misunderstanding

Perhaps you could edit your first comment, otherwise people won’t know that you see things differently now.

I would beg someone to explain code switching for him, but I doubt he’d care.

It always baffles me to say she’s unqualified when she objectively has more relevant work experience than Trump.

Also the “try to sound black” part is just… there’s a lot to unpack there.