Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)T
Posts
11
Comments
1087
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • The problem with that analogy is that eggs are what they are. Chickens and farmers aren't choosing to make eggs with certain levels of protein, fat, and cholesterol.

    Meanwhile social media is what the various companies make of it. Social media itself isn't necessarily the problem, it's that the companies that wield it have malicious intent (read: capitalism), and humanity in general is clearly too stupid to control itself such that we can consume it in a healthy way.

    The punishment shouldn't fall upon the consumers, it should fall upon the manufacturers who have both the power to make a positive change and the knowledge that their current actions are detrimental.

  • There is something wrong with your tech if you need your own nuclear plant to run it.

    I mean, it's better than coal, but still.

  • There's a lot at stake in this election. I hope we can manage not just to survive but lay the foundation to thrive.

  • One of those [Trump-aligned] members, Janelle King, suggested that accuracy was more important than timing.

    ...

    “As a voter, I would rather wait another hour...

    An hour‽ We're talking between thousands and hundreds of thousands of ballots. You absolute troglodyte, you think humans will do a better job than machines?

    ...to ensure that the that the [sic] count is accurate...

    If only we had historical data points to see if humans do a better or worse job at counting accurately...

    ...than to get a count or get a number within that hour, and then to find out at the close of an election, after certifications” already taken place “that we have people suing because the count was not accurate.”

    Which will happen anyway, because y'all can't seem to accept the reality that most of us don't like your demigod.

  • Even if this gets overturned eventually, the goal is to throw sand in the gears for this election.

    We live in some stupid times, and if Democrats get majorities in Congress, I hope they don't forget this time when the GOP cashed in on authoritarianism.

  • Definitely will take time, though let's not discount the fact that Linux came about before the internet was the internet. I don't know if it will take 30 years, but certainly ten years or more doesn't seem unreasonable.

  • RedoxOS is trying to do that with Rust

  • Honestly, this is the question people should be asking in response. I totally get the gut reaction against censorship, but I don't think anyone would agree that Facebook, Xitter, etm. are innocent, neutral parties in all of this.

    Part of the issue (as the article points out) is that those companies have been allowed to essentially craft people's internal narrative, often amplifying our worst impulses and inclinations—all in service of making the black line go up for investors.

    So is banning social media for teens the correct path forward? Maybe in the short term, but until we direct the governance to the companies creating the problems in the first place, we're almost certainly going to have this conversation again in the future.

  • And D&D

  • It's still an ad, intentional or not, mainly because of the unrestrained, almost hyperbolic positivity. It sounds almost exactly like a pitch to investors, assuring them that they can invest in this totally-not-a-fad tech scheme. Also, it's a wall of text...

    Which is exactly what I'd expect from a LLM that doesn't actually comprehend what it's writing but instead plagiarizes and amalgamates businesses pitches and internet fanboy screed.

  • It's not a copyright suit, it's a patent suit. So it's indeed just like the Apple suit, though what patents were infringed upon is still unknown as of now.

  • Eat shit, Nintendo. I hope you lose and experience the Streisand effect.

  • But that's all they are: guesses. The fundamental flaw in looking to history for future behavior is the assumption that each person elected to office has the same motivations, ideals, and philosophies.

    They want to get elected, sure, but wanting to get elected isn't the same as desiring to keep that office. If I had the skills to run for office, I would be willing to sacrifice reelection to ensure good legislation passed, for example.

  • I don't have an interest in the underlying project, but the default setup for Openbox on Archcraft looks really nice.

  • What I disagree with is your implication that they will only ever act in their own interests. I do not know that to be true in the future (and neither do you), as not everyone is motivated by money or power. Enough politicians who see it as vital to the health of US democracy, and change will happen.

    I'm not proposing that it will, only that it is far from a precluded possibility. As Boomers die out and retire, I have hope for the Millennials and Gen Zers who replace them.

  • I disagree, which is why I specified the word "progressive."

  • I don't blame you for getting lost. I listen to a legal podcast, because otherwise, I couldn't keep track of anything myself

  • Yes, we are. "Free speech" isn't unlimited, and one of the limits is speech whose purpose is to encourage violence, aka. the "fighting words" doctrine.

    So not only does he suck, but he did in fact do something illegal.