What do people think of a "journalistic integrity" rule? I know that's also subjective, but I'm trying to think of how to phrase a rule that is basically "don't post intentionally incendiary crap". I guess the rule could just be "don't post intentionally incendiary crap", with some examples of what that means and community opportunities to in some way indicate that an article is incendiary crap.

Me, neither. That's why the article loses credibility to me by positioning the two side-by-side.

It's impossible to discuss topics like this and leave the bias of the website aside; further down in the article, when they're not talking about the tweet, they say asking people to refrain from using gendered language when they don't know the gender of their opponent is "creating an atmosphere of fear":

The irony of the NSDA’s obsession with “safety” is that it actually fuels an atmosphere of fear among students—the fear that they will lose if they once said the wrong thing on Twitter or accidentally refer to their competitor as Miss. This fear is palpable. The NSDA debates—once a forum for the open exchange of ideas—have become a minefield of political correctness, says NSDA student Briana Whatley, 15, of Miramar, Florida.

That makes it clear that this isn't about high school debate at all; it's about the ongoing push to scapegoat trans people. And that isn't a topic that is up for debate or discussion.

I used this book to teach a course. It definitely encourages you to think of programming as a means to an end, and not a skill in and of itself. That is completely fine IF that is what you want, and from your post, it sounds like it is.

If you find you'd like to dive a little deeper, I enjoy the Think Python book as a more "mathematical" and "rigorous" introduction. That doesn't mean it's harder. It just means it has a different approach and end goal!

Yes, once. Our research lab's in-house software suddenly started throwing segfaults. The update was from the Mac side (OS), not the software side, so it would've been near impossible to figure out exactly which feature of the software no longer played nice with the new MacOS. We (me and a mentor) used git bisect to figure out what feature didn't work, and patched it for the new OS update.

The next week I went and bought a new laptop and installed Linux on it so that didn't happen again.

I think these are fair points and definite possibilities! I don't, however, know that I'd agree that these hypotheticals are enough to deny voting rights for local and school elections (remember, the 16 year olds won't be voting for Bush in this scenario). So I don't know if money and propaganda is quite so influential at that small scale--I haven't found it to be in the past. Most people don't even know their local elections are happening, much less know who the party line says to vote for.

Lol, I love that the only repository that meets their guidelines is their own.

Is there any part of this argument that does not also apply to college students? This is a genuine question, not intended as a gotcha. We allow 18 year olds to vote although they are subjected to many of the same pressures and inexperiences.

I also like weird cars. Old cars, used cars. Just because it's a useful object, as many in the thread have pointed out, doesn't mean it's not a special useful object. It takes me and my wife and our dogs on many road trips.

What makes a car special to me are the modifications we put into it to make it OURS. My grandmother-in-law has completely removed the back seats for her minivan and installed blankets and carpet there instead so her dog is more comfortable. I love that. It's shaped around her and her life.

The people who voted for these politicians are by and large not the demographics being fucked over by those policies. I also used to feel like the right response was to laugh at these states, and being reminded that people who didn't want these policies are still suffering from them didn't really convince me of anything--after all, collectively, isn't that the community they're choosing to live in?

What changed my mind about that is realizing the harm is disproportionately distributed. Disenfranchised people are LESS likely to vote republican but MORE likely to suffer the effects of republican government. So when "they get what they voted for", it's really, "the poor get what the rich voted for", and that doesn't make me happy to laugh at at all.

No, but I used to be far more derisive of religion than I am now. My wife is Christian and speaks about how she finds God in the woods, the lakes, and the natural world around her, and I have come to view God less as a specific person or all-knowing entity and more as an embodied collection of feelings and thoughts that people have regarding justice, truth, and love. This helps me reconcile many kinds of spiritual beliefs with my own understanding of the universe as garnered by mathematical processes and the Earth as it is shaped by human hands.

I'm very curious to hear about the attempts you're referencing in your second paragraph!