Those were services, this is a force

Don't forget to work in "dominance" and "lethality"! It really, truly, is all about criticizing and tearing the old thing down, and belatedly stepping it up again with neoconservative vibes.

I suppose https://docs.factorcode.org/content/article-infix.html is actually the better link.

Thanks! I didn't know it was possible to use infix notation.

Thank you

Factor was the first language I ever 'played' with and it absolutely ruined me for every thing else (except maybe prolog and apl).

I did a 4 year degree in earth science minor in CS graduating in 2019 and had to touch microsoft for arcgis in one class, and an excel spreadsheet in another.

Like yeah if you have a lot of pre-existing infrastructure migration can be a pain but MS is not in anyway necessary.

As much as I agree with the need for digital independence and the fact that universities (and governments) in Europe are over reliant on US tech, it is not as simple as you describe.

There is a lot more happening in the administrative and infrastructural side of things in most universities that one barely observes as student. So every change needs to take also that into account, the management and maintenance of services and infrastructures that must reliably support thousands of users, with relatively strict privacy and security standards, and their migration.

See also https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46080495

The thing is: there shouldn't be. Car chases cause far more damage (including injury and deaths of bystanders) than the crimes that precede them do and "air support" is not a defense against that in any way.

Genuine question. What do you think the alternative is?

Let's say for argument's sake, that it was relatively well known that you could just drive away rapidly from a police encounter and successfully escape. Do you think that would affect the number of people who made that decision to do that?

I can see both sides of this, but I'm curious what yours is.

That is the case in many countries and as far as I know many states in US (for non-violent crime). Doesn’t result in a lot of people trying it because most people understand if the police knows who you are it won’t help to drive away and the people who are dumb/high/psychotic to not understand this they will do it regardless of wether the cops chase or not.

So either we just use drones to track people while they escape at normal speeds or we use the pre existing panopticon to do so, or we use normal police detective work. Frankly even helicopters but with out police chasing is noticeably better from an over all lives lost perspective.

Did you know that (pre covid) about half of all police deaths were due to car crashes? Even from a view point which completely ignores non-cops: chases are a terrible plan.

Law enforcement operates in a position where they “can’t lose” an encounter. This is a major cause of rapid and unnecessary escalation with LEOs and the civilians they’ve stopped.

I understand, but again, they shouldn't.

(This is why we want to abolish them)

Friendly reminder that LEOs are civilians as well— while they may dress like it, they are not military.

Very much so. Perhaps their training shouldn't explicitly use such language and work to increase that separation - LE training is notorious for teaching cops old and new that anyone/anything "not a cop" is not one of them, and is a threat or has threat potential.

In an emotional development sort of way: maybe. Subsidized childcare however provides two jobs to the economy for the price of one and every single person worried about birth rates is either a white supremacist or the sort of emotionless economist that 2:1 is appealing to.

We do also have reproductive care written into law.

no