Gallows humor is very hard to pull off without being involved yourself and there is the clear danger of overdoing it. I think the replies are an example of both.
You, my friend, lack a sense of humor.
You'd expect a comment like "I'm caught up with some day job work at the moment" to show up, but this one is clearly pulling humor into the situation, so I think the responses are relatively in matching humor.
People are complicated. I have been to funerals where it is almost like a roast. Some people deal with heavy emotions through humor.
I do understand how if something doesn't affect you it can be very disrespectful to mock it. I am just pointing out that not everyone holds a reverence for even very serious situations.
But the comments themselves are tired and not funny. They seem more like shills for karma or whatever is of value in their community.
I recommend looking up the evolutionary purpose of laughing. Then apply it to the people who used humour in this instance. IMHO, its a perfectly natural response. Appropriateness is there for irrelevant. Certainly not an issue by which one should get one one's high horse and judge others by.
As such, I have to ask: Is it appropriate to judge such people?
But in all fairness, the Ukraine borders the EU and there are political ties or ambitions there concerning the EU. No, I don't know all the details and I wont pretend to, but ultimately, it affects the EU. The US, on the other hand, is a world away and frankly what goes on in the Ukraine is not exactly a big deal to the US or its people. Yes, on a being informed of big events in the world level, it should be reported in the US, but I can understand the US not being that interested. Im sure there are levels of concern for the US, but its a much bigger deal to us in Europe.
I'm sure many of the people unaware of what is going on in Ukraine didn't follow the MSM to begin with.
To be honest, it's perfectly reasonable, there's a 0% chance of it affecting the average US citizen.
I just hadn't learned how much it had escalated.
What many don't realize is that large news organizations often provide two views of the news. One is a view aimed toward the local audience, and focuses on in-country events, and includes a lot of sports and entertainment.
The other view is aimed toward the international audience and focuses on events of world wide importance or interest.
A typical US visitor to a news site will get the local view at US sites, and the international view at non-US sites. Al Jazeera doesn't cover "Arab Idol" the way CNN covers "American Idol", for instance, not because Al Jazeera is serious and CNN is fluff, but rather because Al Jazeera's "Arab Idol" coverage will be in its edition aimed at Arab countries, which US viewers won't see. (Yes, there is an "Arab Idol", and it is as big in Arab countries as "American Idol" is in the US).
Along with the Indian Cricket Team which continues to lose games abroad.
People fighting governments in protests should really understand one thing: they feed the beast with their own money. If they want to have any influence whatsoever they should organize not to go protesting, but to stop paying taxes and stop using corrupt currency. If you do that, then at least everyone will be able to see who initiates violence (and it will be the state trying to take tax money by force) Unfortunately, people are wired to fight individuals, because it's easy to identify them and see some actual paths to fight them. And most people reject the idea that they don't need rulers to make peace and order. Until they keep believing that, they will keep fighting and losing these battles against their owners. History predominantly is on the dark side, showing that most protests either lead to civil conflicts and wars or don't lead anywhere.
There's this joke I once heard: there are more good people than bad people. The problem is that bad people are better organized. That is very true.
Taxation in a corrupt environment transforms into endless series of bribes one must succumb to "speed up the process" for pretty much anything.
How this happened that after few secs this went down from #1 having more than 200 votes.
Is it an algorithm after all?
There are a few notable exceptions.
How do these things go together? They are passing laws in clear violation of the usual process. Of course everything a corrupt government does is legal, since they just make whatever laws they need... you could say the same about Nazi Germany, and it'd be technically correct.
Also, the "legal government" is also trying to violently stay in power, while the protesters stayed peaceful until they were brutally attacked (by now, some have been murdered). So claiming the government has some sort of moral high ground is kinda rich, if you ask me.
> Sure it isn't obvious choose as you try to present it.
Are you projecting? The poster just posted a donation link, and then you claimed it's a clear-cut situation of a "corrupted but legal government against people violently trying to take power".
Poster trying to represent link as donation for ukrainians, and this is lie. This is help for specific political forces. Someone may think they a better than current government, but they for sure isn't "the people" as poster trying to represent. I wont go into political discussion anyway, it isn't topic for HN.
Not pair-programming, good testing, and a minimalist design process.
I think I heard that before who said it?
This I didn't predict.
In fact it is how people knew something bad was about to happen?
I also personally organised 2 Euromaidan hackathons in the last 2 months.