Bah en fait, c'est surtout que c'est impossible de ne pas dire je m'ai quand on parle de Maybelline 
Ok, je sais où est la porte, je sors 😅
Mais non, t'inquiète, ce qui importe c'est de trahir sa classe. Même Kropotkine l'a fait 🤣
Seulement quand j'ai un verre de trop dans l'nez, ou quand on parle de cosmétiques 🤓
Moi j'dis pas, c'est une bonne suggestion !
Tout dépend du contexte social. "Je m'suis" c'est neutre-décontracté, ça passe bien avec les bourges par exemple. Mais quand on est entre bouseux, on s'respecte, on s'donne du "j'me suis".
Qu'est-ce qui existe comme services non-USiens capable de remplacer Apache, Cloudflare, AWS ou encore Azure ? M'est avis que cogner dans les côtes de ces géants tout en investissant dans des alternatives, et encourager leur utilisation, serait une bonne idée à l'échelle européenne.
En ce qui concerne les produits Meta^stase^, il faudrait encourager les services décentralisés comme Pixelfed pour Instagram et Friendica pour Fessebouc. Ne serait-ce qu'en faire la promotion à notre échelle de simples utilisateurices serait un bon début.
Certains disent que ce sont des Angles droits.
Mais mieux vaut s'arrêter là, y a des Angles que je préfère éviter de mettre en colère.
I had an account on Rammy and remember that crap unfolding. It's the same deal, targeting an instance with an inactive admin and posting carbon-copied crap, but without the backing of that fascist instance which name eludes me. Seems like the same sorry waste of space got bored of whatever nazi shithole it crawled into...
That's... unfortunately true. But at least, it has the advantage of being difficult to attack for an intellectually honest person.
My country has been Gladioded, no need to convince me that they're manipulative fucks 😜
My issue isn't about which is closer to the truth, but about using these documents as a proof, as the CIA admitting this or that. I've seen many otherwise well informed MLs frame it that way, and it's a bad look since it make them appear as willingly obtuse or disingenuous. Both the quoted documents are just collected intelligence, and certainly not from an internal source from the politburo which, by the CIA's own admission, they weren't able to infiltrate.
And you said it yourself, there's many historians that did their job well; quoting them instead of some unverified crap would be more convincing.
Edit:
By the way, while looking at my notes on the topic, I found something I saved from "Titoism and Soviet Communism". Given the nature of this document, an analysis for "those who need to know", it's actually closer to a statement about what they thought of the USSR under Stalin at the time.
About "Stalinism" (their word, not mine):
This term is used to denote the teachings of Marx, Engels and Lenin as dogmatically interpreted by Stalin, and as imposed by him on the International Communist Movement.
The term denotes in particular the theory and practice connected with Stalin's personal dictatorship -- "one man rule" -- over the CPSU, the Soviet State, and -- under the guise of "the leading role" of the CPSU -- over the International Communist Movement as a whole.
Edit 2: said document https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80T00246A073800530001-4.pdf
Even in Stalin’s time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist power structure. Stalin, although holding wide powers, was merely the captain of a team and it seems obvious that Khrushchev will be the new captain.
Davel, you do know that this is not a statement by the CIA, but a comment collected from an undisclosed USSR informant?
If we take these unevaluated comment reports as what the CIA thought, they would have changed their mind some time later.
Comments on the Current Soviet Situation:
Stalin was a fanatic, an all-powerful dictator with a persecution complex and a mania for greatness. He wanted to see his goals accomplished during his life- time. If he were still alive, the Soviet Union would be either on the brink of or in the midst of a catastrophe. It is hoped that the present authorities will permit their pursuit of their aims to be tempered by reason, and a recognition of the realities of life. They are normal people, not sick, and see that resistance to change must be considered. As Bukharin and Rykov proposed, many of the changes made by the Soviets can be retained; the others can be abandoned gradually, It is important to make concessions to the peasantry, and the authorities appear to have chosen that road. Malenkov's speech of 8 August 1953 is regarded as a change from an unreasonable to a reasonable policy, Freedom, of course, is the most important thing and the regime can scarcely grant that and retain power. The disappointment to those who regard Malenkov's speech as the beginning of a new era will be terrifying and may have consequences.
Can't say I'm surprised, but still disappointed.