Self-Defined Dictionary is a fresh-new open-source project aiming to allow minoritised groups define the words that describe them – finally from their own perspective, and not the perspective of people who never even experienced their struggles.
I took an opportunity to suggeste a definition of polyamory from a perspective of a polyamorous person.
Fair warning: this library is pretty useless. And only moderately fun... 🤷
But it seemed like a cool way to learn a bit about web components, so here it is: a component that creates googly eyes that follow your mouse.
I like multi-column design. Alas, it’s really annoying to work with. If your tiles don’t all have the same height, it looks awful.
That’s why we have Masonry (and alternatives) – alas, they use absolute positioning (which can be problematic for lazy loading of images, dynamically adding more elements, etc.). We can try doing it with plain CSS – alas, it either breaks the order of tiles or requires knowing the height of the container in advance.
But I think I might have a solution to that: DEMO
As much as I despise DailyMail’s usual hatred and and shittiness, I can’t stand on the side of their recent “victims”: Harry and Meghan Windsor and Elton John. Calling out the hypocrisy and entitlement of the rich is what press is supposed to be doing.
No, honestly, why not? I know why yes, that question is boring, I don’t need anyone convincing me that it’s possible and probably very rewarding to love and be in relationship with more than one person, or that having legal protections for such relationships would be nice.
But I’m curious what would the challenges of such a possibility be.
Politics sucks. Even people who are honestly interested in all the political games often admit: it’s shit.
I would compare it to the Scrum methodology – it might be a useful tool to get your team to get the shit done, but it often ends up resulting in more meetings about what to do than actually doing it.
What if instead of elections we just had a draw?
For whatever reason, many monotheists seem proud of believing in just one god as opposed to those “pagans” who believe in many. They consider it some kind of a “progress” (well, one is closer to the actual number of gods – zero – so technically it might be correct). But are they really monotheistic?
When you walk into the church I used to attend as a child, what do you see in the very center? Yes, the tabernacle, allegedly containing god himself. But what’s way way above it? What’s surrounded by golden ornaments and votive offerings? A figurine of Mary.
Platforma Obywatelska obiecała, że wprowadzą głosowanie elektroniczne. Ta partia nie jest znana z realizowania obietnic, więc nie boję się zbytnio, że ten okropny, okropny pomysł wejdzie dzięki nim w życie. Ale temat mnie poruszył, bo widzę, jak bardzo ludzie są zafascynowani taką opcją i jak bezkrytycznie ją popierają, myśląc, że skoro wszystko inne jest lepsze dzięki komputerom, to głosowanie też musi.
Otóż wcale nie musi.