Combines Germans' favourite things: licking capitalist boots, nationalism and football.
trompete
joined 3 years ago
To add to what comrade @radio_free_asgarthr@hexbear.net posted, here's the RSS feed to add to your app:
That's George "Babyface" Nelson!
I suspect someone made the same joke on Twitter, but I swear I don't have an account and can't read those and came up with that all by myself and I'm giving myself a gold star. It's not even a joke really, it's just a reference to a funny movie, but that's internet humor for you, it still counts.
Federal culture minister Roth commissioned an opinion from a constitutional expert, Christoph Möllers from Humboldt-University Berlin, about the legality of having recipients of art grants sign antisemitism provisions (like propsed in the state of Berlin for example). Yes, Claudio Roth is the one that clapped at the Berlinale during the anti-apartheid speech and then was hounded by the Springer press. In her defense she put out a statement about how she was clapping for the Israeli Jew, forgetting to mention there was a Palestinian on stage as well. That one.
So he looked at the legality of having artists and institutions declare their commitment to diversity, and against racism and antisemitism (in general and also according to something like the IHRA definition, which conflates antisemitism with criticism of Israel), if they want to receive government grants.
Findings:
- Since basically everyone receives these grants in Germany, this is pretty delicate, because it de-facto impacts artistic freedom. The vast majority artists and cultural institutions cannot realistically get out of these pledges, even if they can in theory.
- A commitment to diversity is too vague and would leave the signees unsure about what they can and cannot do.
- A commitment against racism and antisemitism is more concrete, but the IHRA definition is subject to scientific debate, and the state weighing in on this violates academic freedom.
- In order to enforce this, a new control mechanism would have to be implemented, which would be rife for abuse and might narrow the space for artistic expression.
So basically he thinks this would be unconstitutional and a bad idea.
Nazis left most of them alone as long as they kept their heads down, so they survived the war. Western allies put some of them in positions of power when they formed the first occupation governments, because the liberals and conservatives had all pretty much joined the Nazis. This didn't last long of course, denazification was called off and fascists that swore they were now democrats got back in power almost immediately. But the class-collaborationist and anti-communist SPD was, unlike the KPD, not repressed at all, so they became the default and only workers' party. Then they gave up on being a workers' party in order to appeal to bourgeoise media, social climbers, and the industrial sector, and became a generic leftish-liberal party in what was (almost) a two-party system.
Macron apparently put sending troops on the agenda (The Guardian | archive).
France’s President Emmanuel Macron said on Monday he refused to rule out sending ground troops to Ukraine, but said no consensus existed on the step, at a meeting of 20 mainly European leaders in Paris convened by Macron to ramp up the European response to the Russian military advances inside Ukraine.
Protecting France’s strategic ambiguity he said “there is no consensus to officially back any ground troops. That said, nothing should be excluded. We will do everything that we can to make sure that Russia does not prevail.”
He doesn't know when to stop.
Russia, he said, “cannot win this war. It is the sole aggressor. It is the sole country that instigated this war. Russia is now clearly affecting our own safety and security through both traditional and hybrid war.” But he added “we are not at war with the Russian people”.
Macron found a way to passive-aggressively declare war. Or maybe he's declaring a passive-aggressive war, which would be a lot better than an actively aggressive war.
Avatar, the revisionist Plotbender
On the investment aspect, I work with VC's and large companies who invest in and license tech startups across the US, EU, and AP. It there's even a lingering fart's trace of Russia in the company (development, founders, investors) past or present, they won't go anywhere near it. I've even seen founders who ha e a vaguely Russian name, who haven't lived in Russia for years, get turned down for convos.
It's a totally different situ than say, 6 years ago, when places like St Petersburg were burgeoning tech hubs -- the country has been entirely shut out of industries and markers at this point above and beyond anything sanctions are doing.
Oh no the VCs are pulling out of Russian startups. This does not bode well, whatever will they do without all that vaporware?
I also love how they're just being extra racist. Perfectly encapsulates the whole Western strategy in this conflict.
One of the problems with this is that the setting up of the programming environment is different for different computers and operating systems, and becomes outdated with time. Though I'm pretty sure old school manuals for like 80s computers (and BASIC was usually included in that) used to be kinda like that.
Command line interfaces have an advantage there, they don't change as much as mouse interfaces and instructions can be written down rather more easily than mousing instructions. I'm pretty sure you find a C programming tutorials telling you to run
gcc -o foo foo.c && ./foo
from decades ago and that would still work fine on a modern Linux.
search for trueanon truth feed
It's my best translation for "Standortpatriotismus". Literally it is "location patriotism". "Der Standort Deutschland" is a common phrase used when talking about how attractive (or not) of a location Germany is for businesses. It's also the title of good comedy set by Gerhard Polt.