The only output I didn't fully design on my own was the log command (`gg l`). I used information found on this Gist (https://gist.github.com/textarcana/1306223) to retrieve the log information in JSON. From there, I designed an output style on my own.
I'm sorry, but my main take away from the discussion wasn't about the LGBT community at all. It was that India is still not ready for democracy. A candidate decides to try out this election thing without any agenda and plans, and they win without any reason. They don't even know why they won and what they can really do for the community. Giving government jobs to beggars isn't a plan. And I'm saying this as an Indian.
"A candidate decides to try out this election thing without any agenda and plans, and they win without any reason. They don't even know why they won and what they can really do for the community. Giving government jobs to beggars isn't a plan."
Actually, that sounds like normal democracy in action to me. Unprepared candidates being voted in happens all the time in all democracies. And this candidate seems reasonable and may end up doing a good job.
If you look to other democracies for comparison, Talkeetna in Alaska has had a cat named Stubbs as the elected mayor for years. Mel Carnahan got voted into the US senate in an election 3 weeks after his death. And Tiririca the Clown got voted in to Brazil's congress and was completely inexperienced and was accused of being illiterate. He apparently worked really hard and did a very good job of it.
Remember, democracy is not a plan and nobody is ever 'ready' for it. It just tends to be usually less objectionable than the alternatives, especially the planned alternatives.
edit - Also, Ms. Kinnar did not win for no reason.
"I have no experience, I’ve never made a public speech, but while campaigning, I went to every household."
And she seems to have a clear idea of what she wants do to for the community.
"I feel the most-important responsibility I have is towards my people. My community. I have to stop them from begging for money on the trains. Instead, I want to give them jobs in municipal corporation. Apart from that, the deplorable condition of roads and drains in the city worries me. Raigarh doesn’t have a water shortage but taps often run dry. I want to make sure people in Raigarh get adequate water supply."
I agree that democracy is arguably just better than other alternatives. Nothing more. However I can't be happy about a candidate just because they are at least not a clown. Yes, they may do a good job. But that's as good as randomly choosing a candidate and hoping that they do a good job, right? We can surely do better than that.
"In governance, sortition (also known as allotment) is the selection of officers as a random sample from a larger pool of candidates.
In ancient Athenian democracy, sortition was the primary method for appointing political officials and its use was conventionally regarded at the time as a principal characteristic of democracy."
I think we ought to give it a go, see what happens.
I accidentally started to think seriously about your quip, and I think it belies the profound difficulty of the problem. I would contend that it's not obvious that we can do better than random elections.
There's all sorts of perverse and misaligned incentives otherwise. I'm not politician or historian, so I'd love some insight into the consequences of such a system. Intuitively, I would assume it'd just implode from incompetance, but bureaucracies are shockingly resilient on government scales. And I'd have no idea how to reliably find qualified individuals; the USA has a long history of effective leaders coming from seemingly random backgrounds. (Whether these individuals did good or not, well, that's hotly debated to this day... I don't often grok politics.)
Yeah doing better than random is more of my wish than anything based on facts. Now that I think about it, considering the population that self selects itself out of politics in India, maybe random selection of a candidate from all of the population may do better than what we have currently.
By the way, I am not meaning to attack. I completely understand the frustration of watching completely unqualified assholes run the country. I live in the UK.
However, to see what happens when qualified assholes run the country, look to China. They are the world's most successful technocracy. There are more people with engineering degrees in government there than anywhere else I know of. (if anyone cares to correct me on this, please do)
The results of this are nicely mirrored by your respective space programs.
China has people in orbit.
India found water on the moon.
Just so you know my biases, I like what I see as India's democratic openness and China's secular practicality (being a stereotypical Brit who goes around stereotyping stuff so it will fit into all the neat little display boxes).
We can certainly do a lot worse. We could select someone randomly and only be able to get rid of them by killing them. Historically that has been the usual method.
Also, if you plan who should have power, who gets to select the person who makes the plan?
I think you're being a bit cynical, and detracting from the point of the article. Yes in this particular case democracy didn't work so well. But the takeaway is that such a large group of people were not only OK with having a transgender as a mayor. That is good news anywhere.
It says in the article she visited every household. That's proper old-school political campaigning. If people voted for her because they thought it would be funny, then they only thought that because she did the legwork.
Maybe the other candidates were very bad/corrupt so the people thought lets give this person a chance.
Comming back to your point, unfortunately there are still parts in India where candidates win just because they are from the same caste/community as the majority of the people in that constituency.
I've already seen a high level post about how Dropbox does cross-platform development [1], but I think they don't go in details about the kind of issues one might face going with that approach.
Let me disagree with others. As the same version control is used by the entire team in most cases, if Andy is doing any work with others, what others use and prefer (git most likely) would influence what he should try to get proficient at.
That makes absolutely no sense to me. If I get an offer from a bank that $200 is available to me if I open a checking account with them, then do I have to report it as income even if I don't open an account or perform any action to go after it?
The tip4commit payment is a tip paid because of work you did; elsewhere in IRS pub 525 and pub 531 it's clear (well, as clear as any IRS document ever is) that tips count as income.
the checking account offer isn't compensation for something you've already done. I think that makes it clearly distinguishable. But I'm not a lawyer; get competent legal advice before deciding you can pretend a tip-for-commit payment didn't happen.
That depends. The difference here is that they are doing the bitcoin equivalent of leaving money on the table after you did unrelated work. Yea you have to reach down to the table and take it. But the IRS is saying until you do something about it, it counts as income because you effectively own it.
But again, lawyers haven't finished discussing all the legal ramifications of crypto-currencies or for that matter the internet in general.
