You must log in or register to comment.
My guy, that hat is so distracting.
Even help for the development of infrastructure are a way to keep control on those states. Imperialist states create foreign market for their domestic firm. It’s destroy way of life, relationship with the environment and export mass production and agriculture.
While this is all true, it’s much easier to justify to your constituency sending food that was grown and purchased in the local economy.
You’re creating jobs locally, and helping people at the same time!
You’re not helping them long term which was the point of the Sankara quote.
It forces these countries to be dependent on food aid rather than self sufficient which means that if they try to go even somewhat against neoliberalism and actually raise the living standards and wages of their people the US then pulls the aid (as well as likely aiding armed groups to kill the leadership) in order to force the government out and installing comprador regimes in its place.
Same with those charities that “donate” a pair of shoes to developing countries for every pair purchased. And clothing donations are basically just shipping our plastic waste over there and under cutting the local clothing industry at the same time.
Much of the clothing shipped to the country is made from petroleum-based materials such as polyester. When the clothes cannot be used, they end up burning in landfills near Nairobi, exposing waste pickers and local residents to toxic fumes.
“More than one in three pieces of used clothing shipped to Kenya is a form of plastic waste in disguise and a substantial element of toxic plastic pollution in the country,” the report by the Changing Markets Foundation says.
Between 20 and 50 percent of all donated clothing is not of sufficient quality to be sold on the local secondhand market, the foundation says. And what can be sold has a negative economic impact by undercutting the prices of locally produced new clothes.
Is it so difficult to organize things to be read from top to bottom?
Yeah Twitter and derivatives do it weird
Because that’s not how it was ever intended to be read. Look at it from a different perspective.
When quoting a tweet, it’s laid out like an email. Responses are at the top of the email, not the bottom. You go down as you go back through the email chain. The bottom one is the first one. It’s not laid out for sharing a screenshot of a conversation, because that was never the intended use case of the layout.
From that perspective, the layout makes complete sense, and it works perfectly for its intended use. Posting random screenshot out of context to social media was not a consideration.
When quoting a tweet, it’s laid out like an email. Responses are at the top of the email, not the bottom. You go down as you go back through the email chain. The bottom one is the first one. It’s not laid out for sharing a screenshot of a conversation, because that was never the intended use case of the layout.
It fucking sucks for emails too. I can’t tell you the vicious hatred quote-after (a.k.a. top-posting) causes in everyone who actually uses emails for work. Quotes in emails are supposed to be interleaved with the text you are writing: quote part of an email, respond to it, repeat. Just like here on Lemmy or any other messenger or forum. If you look at places where email is actually used for work (like software development mailing lists), this is how it is used still to this day. Worst-case, if you’re lazy but feel the need to add a quote, add it before, so that I see the context before I read your reply. But most likely if you’re doing that, you don’t need the quote at all.
Quote-at-the-end is just a pointless waste of resources imposed on us, mostly by Microsoft and Google. If after reading your email I wanted to read the rest of the thread, I would read the rest of the thread, I have a god damn email client!
From that perspective, the layout makes complete sense, and it works perfectly for its intended use.
No it doesn’t, even a lazy quote-entire-thing-at-the-top would work better, because it provides context before I read the reply. This is just how most western languages work, they are read top-to-bottom. Imagine if a book had its chapters ordered in reverse order!
Imagine if a book had its chapters ordered in reverse order!
漫画家: (͡•_ ͡• )
Thats a lot of words to try and justify not understanding that’s how 99% of people use email.
It’s the default way hitting reply basically everywhere formats a response email. It’s also the way email responses to automated ticketing systems like zendesk tell you to respond, literal instructions at the top of their email saying “please type your reply above this line”.
So that’s what people do. Your preference is nothing compared to 99% of user expectations.
It’s not user expectations, It’s just a default behavior imposed by some mail clients, because engineers wanted to add auto-quotes, but a quote-before would require people to actually think while writing an email. It would be better to just not quote at all, but it is what it is now. If the default behavior switched to no-quote, no-one would notice, because nobody looks at those things anyways.
If you use a software development mailing list and do quote-after, chances are you will be told to stop that. If someone has to actually read and understand your emails in full, instead of skimming them for the one line of info they need, quote-after is not a feasible way to write them.
Advocating for the status quo just because it is the status quo is no argument.
sent from my thinkpad
halcyoncmdr:
Thats a lot of words to try and justify not understanding that’s how 99% of people use email.
It’s the default way hitting reply basically everywhere formats a response email. It’s also the way email responses to automated ticketing systems like zendesk tell you to respond, literal instructions at the top of their email saying “please type your reply above this line”.
So that’s what people do. Your preference is nothing compared to 99% of user expectations.
balsoft:
It fucking sucks for emails too. I can’t tell you the vicious hatred quote-after causes in everyone who actually uses emails for work. Quotes in emails are supposed to be interleaved with the text you are writing: quote part of an email, respond to it, repeat. Just like here on Lemmy or any other messenger or forum. If you look at places where email is actually used for work (like software development mailing lists), this is how it is used still to this day. Worst-case, if you’re lazy but feel the need to add a quote, add it before, so that I see the context before I read your reply. But most likely if you’re doing that, you don’t need the quote at all.
Quote-at-the-end is just a pointless waste of resources imposed on us, mostly by Google. If after reading your email I wanted to read the rest of the thread, I would read the rest of the thread, I have a god damn email client!
halcyoncmdr:
Because that’s not how it was ever intended to be read. Look at it from a different perspective.
When quoting a tweet, it’s laid out like an email. Responses are at the top of the email, not the bottom. You go down as you go back through the email chain. The bottom one is the first one. It’s not laid out for sharing a screenshot of a conversation, because that was never the intended use case of the layout.
From that perspective, the layout makes complete sense, and it works perfectly for its intended use. Posting random screenshot out of context to social media was not a consideration.
rafoix:
Is it so difficult to organize things to be read from top to bottom?
Who the fuck uses mailing lists anymore? It’s 2025.
I bet you still use text-based BBS and IRC too. Probably use Arch too based on the insufferable responses.
Its cool though, your opinion of how it should work is the only one that matters, not the actual reality of how 99% of users do things and how they expect things to work.
Who the fuck uses mailing lists anymore? It’s 2025.
Like half of the software stack for the server you’re writing this on is developed via a mailing list.
Its cool though, your opinion of how it should work is the only one that matters, not the actual reality of how 99% of users do things and how they expect things to work.
As I’ve said, nobody expects quote-after replies. It’s just the default behavior that people pay no attention to. If you disable quotes-after, most email users would not care, since all modern email clients show full email threads anyways.
You’re not grasping the actual conversation here. You’re just arguing about semantics that don’t actually matter, and in the process completely missing the point.
The interface isn’t designed for you. It’s designed for the way 99% of people are familiar with interacting and replying to things.
So Trump is doing everyone a favour by shutting down USAid?
Damn. That’s not what OP meant. USAID could’ve switched tracks on that decades ago - and iirc they did, too, at least partially. Ethical Aid is not a new topic anymore.
