• 0 Posts
  • 39 Comments
Joined 4 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 10th, 2024

help-circle


  • I don’t see that as a viable path forward. If lack of voters decide the election in favor of the opposition (from your perspective), the party most aligned with you will move away from you to stay competitive. If sufficient votes for third party decide in favor of the opposition, you might get some decent movement towards the third party. If there are so many third party votes that your favored main party loses and the third party rises, the dying party may want to enact change, but they’re out of power, and the newly entrenched party won’t want to do it because it’s now helping them.

    Note that none of these result in voting reform. We know because it’s happened. It wasn’t always the Democrats and the Republicans, but it has pretty much always been a two party system once we got through a few elections.

    If you want voting reform, unfortunately, the only way to make that a serious possibility is by making it a serious campaign issue and by fighting to enact it locally and work our way up to the federal level. It’ll be hard to go straight for the top, but some areas are starting to experiment and prove it’s viable. Next step is to go a little bigger or expand into new areas.





  • That shit drives me nuts. Wanna be trusted with my life savings, but they can’t be bothered to implement modern security features until they’re already being phased out. I don’t know what will replace modern 2FA schemes, but I guarantee banks will adopt the current ones about three years after the replacements become standard.

    Also, they’re charging you a poor tax for not having enough money, whether that’s a minimum balance or just accidentally spending a nickel more than you had on hand.













  • As you’ve phrased it, this seems to me to be a question of how to balance the rights of the developer versus those of the end user. The developer wants to monopolize commercial usage while the end user wants full control and authority on their machine.

    Some would argue that the developer’s goals are unethical, but I think it’s an unfortunate consequence of a societal system that would see them starve on the streets if they didn’t earn with their work. In an ideal world, end users would prevail unquestionably, but so long as developers must operate under capitalism where ownership is critical, concessions will have to be made.


  • In the case of libraries, the users of the libraries are not the end users of the program. The users of the library are the developers.

    Except the end user does inevitably become the user of the library when they use the software the developer made with it. They run that library’s code on their machine.

    It claims that it’s freedom for the users, but that’s not true.

    In light of the above, this is incorrect. By using GPL, you preserve the end user’s freedom to understand, control, and modify the operation of their hardware. In no way does the end user suffer or lose any freedoms.