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/)G
Posts
37
Comments
3919
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • Does NY Times want to distract us from having class solidarity?

  • You mean those workflows that could've been traditional scripting and CI/CD, if not for management forcing AI into them? Those workflows?

  • Itd have to be some kind of bubble and that would mean we were in a lottttt of danger and should reasses our use of it.

    Well yeah, but if it were the only sector propping up the whole economy and we reassessed it, the economy would be in a loooooot of danger anyway.

    Luckily, that would never happen...

  • Even not underestimating the scale, I'm not sure it would work because all the debris would need to be ejected from the thousands-of-kilometers-deep hole. And then you'd also have to have a solution to stop the walls from caving in before the next bomb had a chance to arrive. It's almost as if you not only need thousands of extremely powerful (even for nukes) bombs, but also need to deliver them in a continuous stream to keep the blast pressure up and the hole open.

    I feel like, at that point, the easier strategy to accomplish your goal would be redirecting a large asteroid to impact the planet, or something like that.

  • I think you may either be overestimating the effectiveness of nukes or underestimating the thickness of planets.

    Project Plowshare envisioned using nukes to dig holes on the order of hundreds of meters, not thousands of kilometers.

  • It's a terribly planned and ran event that people are embarrassed to attend or just don't want to waste their time standing in the sun with literally no entertainment.

    Or that they flat-out don't want to attend because it's been perverted by fascist idolatry.

  • Contracts require four elements in order to be valid: offer, acceptance, consideration, and intention to create legal relations. EULAs fail at multiple of these:

    1. As I already said, they offer no "consideration" because you already have the right to do the thing they purport to give you permission to do (i.e., make the incidental copy necessary to run the game).
    2. They lack "acceptance" and "intent" because they are contracts of adhesion (sprung on you after the sale transaction is complete and you already own the copy of the software), and clicking through them is nothing but a mechanical act necessary to use your property (which, again, you already have the right to do, by definition of "property!") with no legal intent behind it. And if you have no intent, how the fuck can merely doing a thing you're being forced to do constitute "acceptance?" It is, simply, complete bullshit.

    If it were presented at the time of sale and you had to agree before the money was exchanged maybe it'd be different, but that's not how they do things. And even then, it would still fail at "consideration" unless they offer you something above and beyond the right to use your property, which I cannot emphasize enough, you already have.

    (By the way, since it sometimes comes up as a "gotcha" rebuttal attempt: no, Free Software licenses are not EULAs, and that's why they are valid while EULAs are not. You are not required to "agree" to the GPL etc. merely to use the software; it only kicks in when you want to do something, like modification or redistribution, that would otherwise be copyright infringement. It grants you those new privileges in exchange for accepting its terms, and that consideration is what makes it valid.)

  • It doesn't matter what the EULA says when you never agreed to it in the first place because it failed to meet the basic requirements of a contract.

  • Your comment is an insult to cheesy heist movies.

  • I don't think it's "most" online leftists; I think it just seems that way because the rest aren't posting stupid shit.

  • This is the "theory" by which publishers try to justify the validity of EULAs (they argue: "buying the thing isn't enough; you need to agree to this to be able to actually use it").

    But, fun fact: copyright law has a specific carve-out for that incidental copy, 17 USC §117 (a) (1), which means EULAs offer no 'consideration' and are therefore bunk.

  • I wouldn't argue just that it should be; I would argue that it is and we have a massive problem with the FTC failing to enforce existing law.

  • Conveying something to someone in perpetuity (i.e. "selling" it to them) when you don't have the right to do so is fraud. Just because Amazon or whoever's right to continue offering the thing ended doesn't mean their customers' property rights somehow end with it.

    It's exactly as absurd as a car dealer stealing back all the cars they previously sold just because they ended their agreement with the manufacturer.

    There is absolutely no sane world in which stealing your customers' property could ever be the "only legal resolution!"

  • That, by itself, is absolutely outrageous and absurd. The game developer's failure to license the music appropriately is between them and the music copyright holder; nothing gives them the right to steal the content back from the third parties they conveyed it to in perpetuity.

  • I think stuff continued to get better for a long time after 1991, but upvote for Tandy.

    (I wish I still had my Tandy 1000 RLX/HD.)

  • Free Software is better than it's ever been, but that doesn't outweigh the enshittification going on in the rest of the world. Way too much of my effort using Free Software is spent actively defending myself from surveillance, propaganda, and other threats.

  • First rule of being a bully is always prey on the weak, not the strong.

  • Spanish be like:

  • Speaking of the antipode of Chicxulub, the Deccan Traps formed at about the same time.