I think we are looking at this from different angles. I think you are looking at the programmer perspective, and i am looking at the end-user perspective, who uses a GUI file explorer.

In the case of a GUI file explorer the search handles the case insensitivity. So for me using Dolphin in KDE if i have two files:

TEST.txt and test.txt, if i type “tes” on my keyboard, i will be given the uppercase one first. if i type “te” again, it jumps to the next fitting entry, which is test.txt. If i put “test” or “TEST” in the search bar, i will get back both results.

I see why a strictly case insensitive file system makes it easier for programmers down the line to not have to handle the different cases explicitly in their program anymore.

Hmm you’re right. I didnt notice so far, nor was it brought up as an issue.

You can activate case sensitivity since Win 10 or so.

The search string is case insensitive. The file name isnt.

So you will find all of them.

Mostly Windows, and construction industry. So projects generate anywhere from a few hundred to up to a hundred thousand files.

Everyone has their own filesystem, and then you often have one formal and multiple informal exchange platforms. You still have people throwing around stuff in E-Mails too.

It is a mess. But in this mess i didn’t come acrosse people complaining they couldnt find a file because of the letters case yet.

I see that it could be different for programmers, but i dont see that apples solution of treating upper and lowercase as identical name is the solution there, rather than working with explicit file naming conventions in the program.

if you look for a file you type the first letters for the file explorer to jump to the matching name. Retype to jump to the next fitting entry. If you don’t know about this, you can put your string in the search field. If you don’t know about this, you can sort by metadata like file size or date of last change.

It is a non problem.

Also most workplaces tend to develop a file naming convention, either explicitly or implicitly.

I work with a lot of users and a lot of files in my job.

I don’t remember a single case, where someone had an issue because of upper- or lowercase confusions.

Biden had an entire year to stop sending weapons to Israel. Harris had three months to take a stance publicly that differed from Bidens. Instead she blocked a group advocating for Palestinian rights at the DNC, while Israeli groups were allowed to speak. And the Palestinian group wanted to even tell people to vote for Harris despite everything. She blocked people advocating for electing her, because those people didnt share her support for Israel.

It is distinct crimes. Forcefully displacing people from an area is not the same as annihilating people. And i am amazed that this is something you want to dispute.
Ethnic cleansing is a step below genocide. There is a possibility that ethnic cleansing escalates to genocide, as has been seen many times in history, but equating the two is like equating murder (genocide) and abduction (ethnic cleansing)

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Ethnic Cleansing Background

Ethnic cleansing has not been recognized as an independent crime under international law. The term surfaced in the context of the 1990’s conflict in the former Yugoslavia and is considered to come from a literal translation of the Serbo-Croatian expression “etničko čišćenje”. However, the precise roots of the term or who started using it and why are still uncertain.

The expression “ethnic cleansing” has been used in resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly, and has been acknowledged in judgments and indictments of the ICTY, although it did not constitute one of the counts for prosecution. A definition was never provided. Definition

As ethnic cleansing has not been recognized as an independent crime under international law, there is no precise definition of this concept or the exact acts to be qualified as ethnic cleansing. A United Nations Commission of Experts mandated to look into violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia defined ethnic cleansing in its interim report S/25274 as “… rendering an area ethnically homogeneous by using force or intimidation to remove persons of given groups from the area.” In its final report S/1994/674, the same Commission described ethnic cleansing as “… a purposeful policy designed by one ethnic or religious group to remove by violent and terror-inspiring means the civilian population of another ethnic or religious group from certain geographic areas.”

The Commission of Experts also stated that the coercive practices used to remove the civilian population can include: murder, torture, arbitrary arrest and detention, extrajudicial executions, rape and sexual assaults, severe physical injury to civilians, confinement of civilian population in ghetto areas, forcible removal, displacement and deportation of civilian population, deliberate military attacks or threats of attacks on civilians and civilian areas, use of civilians as human shields, destruction of property, robbery of personal property, attacks on hospitals, medical personnel, and locations with the Red Cross/Red Crescent emblem, among others.

The Commission of Experts added that these practices can “… constitute crimes against humanity and can be assimilated to specific war crimes. Furthermore, such acts could also fall within the meaning of the Genocide Convention.”

https://www.un.org/en/genocide-prevention/definition#tab4

Ethnic cleansing is a step below genocide. The Democrats went for genocide. So far Trump only wants ethnic cleansing. Also his argument for ethnic cleansing is the destruction that the Democrats caused during the genocide.

This is not defend Trump. It is to remember that the Democrats are as equally part of the oligarchy and criminal empire as the Republicans. No positive change can come out of the current Democratic party. It needs to be reformed from the bottom up, or replaced by an actually progressive party.

Biden was just fueling the genocide and would have continued to do so for all eternity, while having Blinken pay some lip service.

Pretending like Biden or Harris would have done anything different is laughable. Also they gave Trump the argument to ethnically cleanse Gaza based on the destruction that was done with American weapons consistently given to Israel to do exactly that. The end goal for Biden and Harris was equally to extend the Israeli control as a means to extend the US empire.

Now the Democrats might be inclined to change their position and get rid of the Zionist elites that are poisoning the party since decades. Or they just go around claiming how their genocide was a better final solution than Trumps ethnic cleansing, emphasizing again, that human lifes of people outside the US are worthless to both sides of the empires political coin.

Bashar already went on to a neoliberal course and privatized many businesses and removed many social securities that his father Hafiz granted.

The social contract in Syria under Hafiz was working on the basis of “If you keep your mouth shut, the government will ensure your everyday needs.” Under Bashar it was “We will fuck you economically and you keep your mouth shut, because we torture and kill you otherwise.” So there was only negatives, and a lack of things for people to lose, which is the basis of revolutions.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Syria#1990s–2000s:_Liberalization_and_privatization

No. Elon is evidently a Nazi as he constantly advocates for facism and sepecifically uses the symbols and language of the historocal German Nazis.

Which in turn stimulates local production, which in turn leads to economic growth…

Seriously people, Protectionism is a tried and tested method. In the right circumstances it is a powerful tool. The question is, whether these circumstances apply in the current US, but look at all industrialized nations. They used protectionism to grow their industries and now they oppose other countries protectionism to keep them small.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism

Tariffs affect both sides, but the side with the protectionism can build up a local industry thanks to the tariffs. (Assuming access to the relevant resources)

That is why all industrialized nations used high tariffs to protect their emerging industries and once they were established demanded low tariffs from other countries to keep their industries small and the markets dependent.

While in the short run this means a price increase for the consumer, in the long run the local employment and production increase the wealth to offset the initial price increase. That is why “free trade agreements” by industrialized nations often hav devastating effects on the developing nations they push them on. Western “free trade” has ravaged farmers and small business producers in Africa, Asia, South America…

Finally the government can spend the money it raised through the tariffs to stimulate further growth with spending, or by lowering taxes in other fields.

Trump understands very well what he does there, and it is not like the economic theory behind it is complicated. The question is, whether this strategy makes sense for the US when there is retaliatory measures taken by the affected countries seeking to export to the US.

It is the same principle like carbon taxes btw. if you oppose tariffs solely based on the notion that they are “paid by the importer and not the exporter”, you would need to reject carbon taxes, as they are “paid by the consumer, not the company.”

I think it is important to understand what gave them their recent power. The self imposed neoliberal austerity and self imposed paralysis of the current government of social demcorats, greens and liberals had pushed the small fissures that developed through rising inequality over the past 30 years in Germany into fully blown open cracks. Especially the failure to address the economic and social impact the Covid pandemic had swiftly followed by the huge inflation with Covid and the invasion shorty after, cracked a lot of people. Meanwhile the conservative CDU just went into full right to far right populist attack mode, actively sabotaging both the federal and local governments.

Russian has been playing its propaganda game for at least a decade before that, but instead of addressing the systemic issues in Germany, politics ever only chased the next few years and Merkel just smothered the country into sleep, while the problems grew.

Now the solution would be to address necessary investments, providing a vision for a secure and positive future. Instead the government runs after far right populist ideas, becoming ever more authoritarian and racist. And this only further helps the populists of AfD and BSW presenting these as “solutions”.

“world’s largest democracy” run by a fascist, who embraces pogroms against the Muslim minorities and assists Israel in its genocide against palestinians, including sending India troops there.

Of course Israel is best buddies with Modi in the same way they sold drones to Russia after the Crimea annexation, which later helped Russia bomb Ukraine during the main invasion. Neither country is a liberal democracy, nor do they share interests with “the West” past their own immediate advantage.

The factor is derived from extensive analysis and sound research. and the factor 5 is on the low end. The spread easily goes up to 10 indirect deaths per recorded death. And that is with there being some sort of infrastructure left. Israel deliberately annihilated all of it and continues to do so.

To show you how silly your argument is. “it is just multiplication by some factor” is also applied to gravitational force and many other physical phenomenon.

In this case it is absolutely crucial, as one of the repeated arguments made by the genocide supporters is “its just war, they try to prevent civillian deaths” or “if it was genocide they would have killed much more people”

These are lies. They are absolutely deliberate in what they do, and the realistic numbers prove that. The numbers of people officially recognised as dead has been rising only slowly since april/may. This is not because the killing and devastation have become less, they got worse. It is because the health system has collapsed after Israel made a point of destroying it.

IDF soldiers have been seen pulling small levers on handheld devices.

Eygi fell to the ground with blood coming out of her head around the same time.

In private he will probably congratulate them on having taken out another one of the brown people for them.