True, although I believe things only got so bad after the party elite had became isolated from their base, and the above is how they initially became isolated from them in the first place.
True, although I believe things only got so bad after the party elite had became isolated from their base, and the above is how they initially became isolated from them in the first place.
From what I remember, they repeatedly voted against anything left of what they considered centre in the primaries because they followed the theory that only centrists (or those as close to the other party as possible) win elections, by swaying swing voters in the middle. The other party had long abandoned the idea by this point however, because chasing what they considered centre often meant upsetting those finding themselves outside of that centre.
If the people voting in the primaries were more representative of those outside views, perhaps there could have been another outcome. However, not many of those people vote in primaries.
It’s good, I would have thought the same if I were to stumble on it now. Somebody must have provided an extremely quick downvote, because I hadn’t downvoted you
This comment section wasn’t so full or censored when I commented that, and I know the ones I saw before they were censored weren’t saying that.
I feel like you’ve built two straw-men and conflated them together. I haven’t seen anybody arguing either case on the left side of the meme in response to the images depicted (or similar) on the right side of the meme. People wanting to send weapons to Ukraine generally tend to also say it doesn’t have a Nazi problem (and may compare Russia with Nazis), and people wanting pacifism in Palestine also don’t like weapons and support sent to Israel.
Autism affects how senses are processed, and taste is a sense - some autistic people don’t want things that are strong or that vary a lot, preferring consistency instead.
With that being said, it’s not a universal thing, different people are affected differently.
They’ve been working on GIMP 3.0 for over a decade, which has non-destructive editing, as well as an upgrade to the UI toolkit (although actual UI changes are still to-do). They don’t want it to be this way, development has just been insanely slow. Mostly due to lack of developers and donations, although that has been changing recently.
They planned to have GIMP 3.0 out by May, but with so many delays it might be a few months yet.
I think that’s more what the people excited about AI think it it is, many of the people who fear it don’t really fear its intelligence as much as how it’s abused. Personally, I don’t even like the machine learning algorithms in social media, despite them being a thing for a long time now.
I think it should be clarified that GIMP’s structure isn’t able to make use of donations to GIMP as a single entity. Edit: or at least wasn’t, I hear they can now.
I agree that Krita is more promising though, I switched to Krita years ago and have never looked back.
From what I understand, GIMP fell behind because it refused corporate donations while Krita accepted them. This lead to GIMP reducing in scope as the 1-3 part-time* developers (at least when I last really looked into it) realised they’d never catch up, leading to people donating less as they weren’t satisfied with GIMP’s simultaneous underpromising and underdelivering. Meanwhile Krita managed to receive enough money to hire a team of full time developers for several years, leading to better software, to more donations. It’s like the poverty trap, but with software.
Imagines is probably a better word, not all fiction is fantasy.
I suppose you’re right. They’d been shifting for a long time.