Jayjader

The French political system, casually referred to as the “Republic of Friends,”

Where does the author get this? I'm French and have never heard of our system called as such - especially not by a French person.

Kinda disappointing.

The article is really trying to sell us, the reader, that using Linux without knowing how to use the command line is not only possible but totally feasible. Unfortunately, after each paragraph that expresses that sentiment we are treated to up to several paragraphs on how it's totally easier, faster, and more powerful to do things via thé command line, and hey did you know that more people like coding on Linux than windows? Did you know you can do more powerful things with bash, awk, and sed than you ever could in a file manager?!

FFS vim and nano are brought up and vim's "shortcuts" are praised... in an article on how you can totally use Linux through a gui and never need to open up the command line.

Who is this written for? outside of people who not only already use Linux but are convinced that using any other OS is both a moral failing and a form of self-harm?

There was a big storm around 2009 in the south west of France (where there are a lot of pine tree plantations); an entire generation of trees ended up looking like this.

Basically, strong continuous winds flatten very young trees without killing them. They then keep growing, with a permanent kink in trunk, near the base such as these. Not great for sawing into planks, but they work just fine to make paper and agglomerate.

It's incredible how resilient trees are!

For clarity's sake: I have been daily driving Linux, specifically ArchLinux, for the past 9 years, across a rotation of laptop and desktop computers. I do almost everything in the command line and prefer it that way.

I still think if you want people to try Linux you need to chill the fuck out on getting them to use the command line. At the very least, until they're actually interested in using Linux on their own.

I think the point is to scold Google for the harm they cause or fail to prevent. When the law is written so as to genuinely prevent harm (data protection, for ex) then I will scold those who don't follow it. When the law is written so as to be ineffective at best and harmful at worst, I will scold those who do follow it.

The point isn't to be consistent with regards to the law, as the law itself is not always either consistent nor "good".

... unless it is me that isn't understanding your own comment?

Still, I think the only way that would result in change is if the hack specifically went after someone powerful like the mayor or one of the richest business owners in town.

Microsoft is pivoting its company culture

Oh yes, the thing they're well known for succeeding at.

I align with that article 's conclusion; in fact such a "fediverse browser" is exactly what I think the fediverse needs to fully replace closed/proprietary/traditional social media.

However, some of their arguments seem off. For example, for the client to be able to choose/implement it's own sorting algorithm, it seems to me that it would need to have access to all posts. At that point, your client is just another server, with all the problems that we're originally trying to avoid.

I have the same problem with your proposal / nostr's approach: you may obtain a portable identity but all the "content" tied to that identity still has to live somewhere - someone else's server or your own.

Wow, I think that's the first fedi instance I've ever seen that's more or less dedicated to a single video game. Very cool.

This cannot be tolerated, even under Eisenhower.

I suddenly want to insert this into my everyday life

I already use pass ("the unix password manager") and there's a pretty decent extension that lets it handle 2fa: https://github.com/tadfisher/pass-otp

Worth noting that this somewhat defeats the purpose of 2fa if you put your GitHub password in the same store as the one used for otp. Nevertheless, this let's me sign on to 2fa services from the command line without purchasing a USB dongle or needing a smartphone on-hand.

It's such a destructive mindset, and it seems to me like indie games are hopefully on the cusp of re-demonstrating to the rest of the industry why it is so.

Art/luxury products depend on catering to subjective tastes to turn a profit. You need to speak to someone's perspective or interests, and are competing for their disposable income against all other forms of entertainment. Thus the wider the targeted audience, the harder it is to outcompete the rest of the market on "consumer interest" (no idea if that's the proper use of the term but it sounds correct for the context), the harder it is to even turn a profit.

Simultaneously, these corporations want an ever-greater magnitude of profit (aka growth). So they decide to target the widest audience possible, while investing as much capital as they can.

That's already an unstable balance of priorities. As soon as you start conceiving yourself as competing with almost every single other market on the basis of shareholder speculation, in terms of ROI, it's doomed.

You're not just shooting yourself in the foot, you're trying to do a Paul Muad'hib Atreides except because this is reality, not sci-fi, instead of drinking the Water of Life you mixed 10 grams of ketamine, 5 tabs of acid, and a fistful of meth into a blue Gatorade and chugged it in one go. All you end up doing is vibrating in place so hard you begin to slough off flesh and erratically disintegrate, like some sort of sad eldritch horror.

God do I hate corpos sick with capitalism.

To continue the Dune analogy, they really could use some ecology-derived thinking: specialize and find your niche (or help it emerge), and give back to the rest of the ecosystem so that it continues to flourish with you. Monoculture has a negative correlation between scale and sustainability, let alone ROI.

An important part of that process that needs mentioning is that when the mothers are convinced by Nestle to feed their babies formula instead of their breast milk, their bodies will stop producing the milk before the baby is weaned from it.

So Nestle literally endangers babies' lives just to sell more baby formula.

The problem is that lemmy.ml hosts too many popular communities. There are people who want them gone from their feeds but also don’t want their Lemmy experience to become empty and boring.

The solution is to build up more attractive alternatives of those communities elsewhere, not endlessly campaign the existing users to just drop them. I understand that awareness of why people want alternatives is important for those alternatives to have a chance at attracting users, and being discovered in the first place. I just have yet to actually see these alternatives receive the care they (imo) require to justify switching to them.

The current fedidb stats, to me, state that 488 people is, colloquially speaking, nobody.

Maybe it's too soon to make such a judgement call, we'll see over the next few days as people get the chance to see this post.

For what it's worth: I self-host gitea, and it gives me the possibility to import not only repos but also issues, projects, etc from GitHub, gitlab, bit bucket, and a handful of others.

I don't know if Utterances can work with gitea's API. If it does, then in theory you should be able to migrate to gitea from GitHub for this use case.

Interesting to note that this was originally posted a little over a year ago. I don't know if anything has changed since, as I don't self host masto and have been spending more and more of my "fedi-time" here in lemmy.

Not surprised that someone who "led AI and subscription products at Amazon for the past 8 years" ended up back on mastodon.social, but that's probably neither here nor there...

It weirds me out that most of the arguments for nostr I come across are around how "you can't loose your identity, it's just a private/public keypair!". Maybe I just don't get banned enough to understand the perspective, but to me the real problem is the content/discussions being lost, not usernames for some corner of the web.

I really don't care about loosing my identity on a social media website; I've found it healthier to view social media accounts on the same level as my customer account at my isp and power utility. When I change ISPs, the old account is closed down and I start up a new one at the other ISP. What's important to me is the service getting delivered, not that it remembers that I'm the same person from however many years ago. It's still the same me here in my body, interacting with the web. I know what I need from it, it doesn't always need to remember who I am (and sometimes I'd rather it forgot or never knew in the first place).

My final point is a bit of a troll, but also kinda serious: how decentralized is it when your identity is "centralized" in your key pair? Loose your keys or loose your password to the key, and your identity is similarly effectively gone. Even worse in this case, no-one can restore it for you. Which is why I don't tie my identity that much to any online service, especially ones I don't host. The only thing that truly preserves my identity is the flesh-and-blood body that I inhabit (and even that isn't fail-proof).

I've interacted with GPG signing circles before. So many people are losing access to their keys. So many more are considering some of their keys as compromised. In either case they're regularly generating wholly new keys, essentially rebooting their "identity" from scratch. When they do so, they always rely on flesh-and-blood interactions to have their new identity verified and trusted by others.

Maybe it's a question of which circles we're involved in; mine are already regularly hopping accounts, without being forced to by bans or server outages. I'm used to interpreting the tone & content to recognize "people", and ignoring usernames. On top of that so many people regularly change their display names on social media for vanity and expression purposes that I can't reliably use them anyways for recognizing accounts.

According to Our World In Data (which claims to use the Energy Institute's Statistical Review of World Energy from 2023 as a data source), that waste is from producing around 70 TWh each year:

That only covers around a third of Switzerland's energy consumption over those years. Furthermore, Switzerland is a small mountainous country with decent access to hydropower (making up around a third of its needs over the same years). They are not necessarily representative of the waste that would accumulate from a more agressive switch from fossil fuels to nuclear across the world (which is what we're talking about, if I'm not mistaken).

France is about 10 times larger in surface area and according to the same source, consumed/produced over 1,000 TWh of nuclear energy each year:

And officially has still has no place to put the high-energy waste (source - in french), leaving it up to the plant's owners to deal with it. There is an official project to come up with a "deep" geological storage facility, but no political will seems musterable to make that plan materialize beyond endless promises.

I should mention that I'm not super anti-nuclear, and I would certainly rather we focus on eliminating coal and oil power plants (and ideally natural gas ones as well) before we start dismantling existing nuclear reactors that are still in functioning order.

That being said, there are other problems with nuclear moving forwards besides waste management. The main one that worries me is the use of water for the cooling circuits, pumped from rivers or the sea. Not only do open cooling circuits have adverse affects on their surrounding ecosystems, as the planet gets warmer and the temperature swings during the hotter seasons become more pronounced, the power plants will become less efficient. The water going in will be at a higher temperature than it is today, and thus will absorb less energy from the nuclear reaction itself.

Overall, I don't trust our current collective responsibility as a species to manage our current forms of nuclear production. Russia sent its own troops into the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone to dig trenches in contaminated soil last year, and they allegedly recognized last week that the Zaporizhzhia power plant is now "unsafe to restart" because of the military activity in the region.

The world has not experienced generalized warfare with nuclear power plants dotting the countryside; WW2 ended around a decade before the first nuclear power plants were up and running in the USSR, the UK, and the USA.

Not to mention how few European countries have access to uranium on their own soil/territory. Of course, most of the rare earth metals used in photoelectric panels and windmills aren't found there either, but as least with "renewables" they are used once to make the machinery, not as literal fuel that is indefinitely consumed to produce power.

I don't know enough about thorium-based reactors nor molten salt-based reactors to go to bat for them instead, but they seem like a more promising way for nuclear to remain relevant.

Armchair geopolitics explanation: it's a culture/societal difference between a thousand year old monarchy and a federalist state that lost 2 world wars on their own land. Not to mention the federalist state had a "communist" power structure in control of about half of their lands for half a century while the other half birthed a regional free trade juggernaut. Meanwhile, the monarchy has a landed elite class/aristocracy that persists to this day.

What I'm getting at is that the wealth in the UK could be much more heavily tied up in individual fortunes and estates than the wealth in Germany. That kind of wealth seems easier to "protect" by offshoring (and/or the UK has evolved to prefer/rely on it).

In contrast, I expect the wealth in Germany to be more tied up in corporations, stocks, etc. This in turn would lend itself to corporate forms of tax evasion that can happen domestically.

Can confirm, ran fine on my desktop machine without needing to tinker (caveat: I changed the "compatibility layer" to use proton-ge before attempting to launch it of my own initiative).

In light of the recent forays by AI projects/products into the reason of coding assistants, from copilot to Devin, this reads to me as a sign that they've finally accepted that you can't make an ai assistant that provides actual value from an LLM purely trained on text.

This is Microsoft copying Google's captcha homework. We trained their OCR for gBooks, we trained their image recognition on traffic lights and buses and so signs.

Now we get to train their ai assistant on how to click around a windows OS.

Art might not be about thinking while you are experiencing it, but it most definitely is about thinking about the experience afterwards, as much as experiencing it in the first place.

Not to mention that books are often art.

He called during his televised speech to get rid of the "ruckus causers", separately from the far right.

The current largest leftist party had (until last night) close to a third of Parliament, and have a reputation of loudly contesting shit they don't stand for.

I really don't think Macron's intention is to give them a chance at more votes. If anything, he's hoping this forces leftist voters to move towards the center, seeing as how his own party barely cleared 14% (the largest far right party did over 30, and a smaller splinter party got around 7% on its own).

Disclaimer: not a physicist, and I never went beyond the equivalent to a BA in physics in my formal education (after that I "fell" into comp sci, which funnily enough I find was a great pepper for wrapping my head around quantum mechanics).

So space and time per se might be continuous, but the energy levels of the various fields that inhabit spacetime are not.

And since, to the best of our current understanding, everything "inside" the universe is made up of those different fields, including our eyes and any instrument we might use to measure, there is a limit below which we just can't "see" more detail - be it in terms of size, mass, energy, spin, electrical potential, etc.

This limit varies depending on the physical quantity you are considering, and are collectively called Planck units.

Note that this is a hand wavy explanation I'm giving that attempts to give you a feeling for what the implications of quantum mechanics are like. The wikipédia article I linked in the previous paragraph gives a more precise definition, notably that the Planck "scale" for a physical quantity (mass, length, charge, etc) is the scale at which you cannot reasonably ignore the effects of quantum gravity. Sadly (for the purpose of providing you with a good explanation) we still don't know exactly how to take quantum gravity into account. So the Planck scale is effectively the "minimum size limit" beyond which you kinda have to throw your existing understanding of physics out of the window.

This is why I began this comment with "space and time might be continuous per se"; we just don't conclusively know yet what "really" goes on as you keep on considering smaller and smaller subdivisions.

You may also interact with countless bots without ever knowing, because creating fake identities is free.

Maybe. Bots don't seem currently capable of holding a conversation beyond surface level remarks. I think I tend to engage with thought-provoking stuff.

On the off chance that I reply to a bot, it is as much for my reply to be read by other humans viewing the conversation. So I don't understand how interacting with countless bots is supposed to be such a big downside.

Plus, I don't see how public/private key pairs prevents endless "fake" identity creation/proliferation. It's not like you need a government-issued ID to generate them (which, to be clear, still wouldn't be great -just got other reasons).

Fair, some people value their identity.

To be clear, I'm talking about online identities. In which case, I would argue that if you value it so much you should not delegate it to some third party network. My IRL identity is incredibly valuable to me, which is why I don't tie it up with any online communications services, especially ones I have no control over.

For average people nothing changes, the app can hold their key for them and even offer email recovery.

...so then the app can post on my behalf without me knowing? And it'll be signed as if I had done it myself. I don't understand preferring this if you're not also self hosting.

That's something having signatures and a web of trust solves.

But as I wrote in my previous message regarding gpg signing circles (a web of trust), that doesn't "solve" things. It just introduces more layers and steps to try and compensate for an inherently impossible ideal. Unless I'm misunderstanding your point here?

Besides, you fail to see another problem: Whichever centralized, federated site you use can manipulate anything you read and publish.

I just take that for granted on the internet. It's true that key-signing messages should make that effectively impossible for all but the largest third parties (FAANG & nation-states). But you still need to verify keys/identities through some out-of-band mechanism, otherwise aren't you blindly trusting the decentralized network to be providing you with the "true" keys and post, as made by the human author?

Anyway, if you don't see a need for tools like nostr you don't need them.

Maybe I'm not expressing myself properly; I don't see how nostr (and tools like it) effectively address that/those needs.

Sort of like how there was (arguably still is) a need for cash that governments can't just annul or reverse transactions of, yet bitcoin and all cryptocurrencies I'm aware of fail on that front by effectively allowing state actors (who have state resources) to participate in the mining network and execute 51% attacks.

I was expecting more to this "analysis" than a graph plot too dense to read. Not much else to say, given the brevity of the article.

Not necessarily cash, but definitely a bit of luck. Some lawyers, if they think a case is guaranteed to go your way, will do the work for free in exchange for receiving a portion of the damages the final judgement will award you. Even rarer, some lawyers care enough about some issues on a personal level that they'll work for free, or reduced rates, on certain cases.

In this case, I'm not sure there are any damages whatsoever to award to OP - a "win" is forcing the company to abide by the GPL, not pay up money. The EFF and the FSF, as others have brought up, are probably the best bet to find lawyers that would work on this case for the outcome instead of the pay.

[phatic to attempt to convey that I appreciate and think I understand what the article is trying to say] Thanks for taking the time and effort to lay it all out in writing!

I particularly appreciated reading part/chapter 4; many of your statements resonate with my own lived/subjective experience.

[with the phatic niceties covered, here is the meat of my comment:]

There is a phrase that I am uncertain how exactly to interpret:

Even more so because English speakers appear to have a second brain to scrutinize language for microscopic signs of alignment.

Is this more of a throwaway joke, or a serious expression of something you notice? I wonder, notably, about how particular this is to English speakers (and I realize as I write this that I may just be re-enacting the behavior you deplore in your ice cream example). I am French/English bilingual and have lived in both the USA and France; in my experience, the determining factor in whether someone exhibits this "second brain" behavior/characteristic is their degree of preoccupation with politics (and to an extent, their familiarity with the history of politics and propaganda).

Something about seeing what arguments have been used to prepare, enact, and justify atrocities in the past makes those arguments very hard to take at face value the next times they are encountered. Consider the "states' rights" rhetoric used to justify and rehabilitate the Confederacy's succession after they lost the Civil War; that specific wording triggers immediate wariness in me today, and I'm willing to wager it also triggers it for most people that:

1. have learned a certain amount about that period and/or the "Lost Cause" movement, and
2. are ostensibly against slavery and racism (in principle, if not in practice).

Yet the term "states' rights" did not have that effect on me the first time I encountered it - I developed that reaction as I learned more about who was using that term, where and when it came from, and what was effectively being said when that term got employed.

Similarly: McCarthyism, the red scare(s), and the apparent failure of self-proclaimed communist revolutions over the past century to effectively bring about "free and egalitarian societies", have together trained many English speakers to deeply mistrust anything that could be the start of a "slippery slope" to communism - even when they readily agree that "something must be done" to reign in the damages of severe inequality. This seems to me to be a product of specific events in world history rather than anything intrinsic about the English language and/or the cultures that speak it.

On the other hand, English is (to my understanding) somewhat uniquely a mishmash of other languages' grammars and vocabulary, with notably so many synonyms that can imply slight and subtle nuances. Perhaps it lends itself to a higher level of scrutinizing seemingly innocuous phrasings (to the point that a human brain develops mechanisms and habits for it) because there are more choices available for articulating an idea.

"the Nukhba terrorists" is wild

Unless I'm misunderstanding, that's a bit like calling current-day IDF members "the Shoa terrorists"

100% agree that the USA is a special case. The country's geography (occupies a significant, contiguous portion of the continent) and legacy as the "last remaining superpower" basically requires a non-trivial amount of effort for most Americans to be exposed to non-American anything, let alone people. On top of that, the two-party duopoly is so entrenched in (and fabricated by) the ossified voting & election system that it becomes very hard to separate "fighting for what you believe in" from "fighting against the 'other half' of the country".

This seems right up my alley, as a fan of the Micromachines games and RTS in general.

I'll try to give it a go when I regain a decent internet landline.

You're right, I should have been more specific.

If you're already storing your password using pass, you aren't getting 3 factors with pass-otp unless you store the otp generation into a separate store.

For services like GitHub that mandate using an otp, it's convenient without being an effective loss of 2fa to store everything together.

If I remember my series analysis math classes correctly: technically, summing a decreasing trend up to infinity will give you a finite value if and only if the trend decreases faster than the function/curve x -> 1/x.

I didn't necessarily think you were being sarcastic, but I appreciate the clarification.

You're correct, that was a rather shallow comparison for me to make.

I don't think raw upvotes give the full story either. I'd be interested in seeing, for example, from which instances the voters are distributed.

Why would anyone try to register via a non-official app first (especially for a procedure like signin-up) is beyond me.

You may or may not have heard this before, but the app is not the instance is not the platform. I registered both my Mastodon account and this Lemmy account via their respective instance websites. I used mastodon in the browser for literally over a year before installing an app for it on my phone.

Apps are alternative front-ends to the fediverse, even "official" ones.

"Basic stuff" is very weird to read for me when many of the internet services I have accounts for don't have apps - and I would rather they never make an app for it. My electricity bills, my hosting costs, my home internet, all are done through web pages that I can access from any internet-connected device, unlike an app.

Not to mention I appreciate being able to type things on a bigger screen and physical keyboard when I register for things.

Lastly, it is much easier for me to deal with a sloppily made website than a sloppily made app. I can use extensions, and if need be can open up the network tab to see if the registration request was accepted or not before the website malfunctioned on my end.

Yes, sway presents itself as a drop-in replacement for i3 (just built on top of wayland instead of xorg).

I've used it on a Thinkpad laptop for close to 4 years, and on my desktop for the past 3.

The only problems I've encountered are some apps not being Wayland-compatible; xwayland makes the rendering work for those but then things like sharing a window or the entire screen don't always work. Notably, Discord's sharing doesn't work, but I can use OBS to record any entire screen since [the OBS devs] put in the work to properly support Wayland.

Some slight pushback from a French person: we aren't purists, our old reactionary institutions are purist (notably the Académie Française which, fun fact, is officially "in charge" of the french language while having zero linguists in its ranks).

Hang out with a group of young adults in France and you'll hear a ton of English and a decent sprinkling of Arabic amongst the French.

Also, it's not just French, Spanish has "ordenador". It makes some linguistic sense; computers do compute but they also sort and arrange numbers.

There was a good (albeit short) conference at FOSDEM2020 that gave an overview of a bunch of different "prior work" with regards to government using open source: https://archive.fosdem.org/2020/schedule/event/municipal_government/

With regards to other comments about Munich, the speaker touches on that case starting at 7 minutes into the conf, and highlights how it differs/differed from other, more successful, cases.

As long as i can prompt-engineer my way into twice the salary for half the hours, that might still be worth it!

Right?

"Protecting vulnerable individuals" - they must mean Putin and Bibbi, not actual victims of political intimidation, sabotage, etc.