• 0 Posts
  • 67 Comments
Joined 4 years ago
cake
Cake day: October 2nd, 2020

help-circle
  • The planet does

    The planet which happens to be where we live and borrow atoms from to make our physical bodies?

    Poisoning the planet is poisoning ourselves.

    Where do you think that CO2 is even coming from? It doesn’t magically teleport into the air. It’s coming from the very pollution sources we’re talking about. In one year ~89% of CO2 pollution came from emissions sources which are harmful to us and other life.

    Stop poisoning ourselves == stop poisoning the planet.

    The mentality that we can somehow magically separate one from the other suits the polluting industries very well.


  • Notice how public discourse goes round & round in a lively show, but never seems to get anywhere?

    This is strawman public discourse, and its largely by design.

    Stop thinking, worrying and especially talking about climate change.

    Instead talk about pollution & poison

    Everyone can see it. It can’t be denied or handwaved or debated away.

    STOP POISONING OUR AIR, WATER AND SOIL.

    WE NEED THEM TO BREATH, LIVE AND GROW OUR FOOD. (duh)


  • When you work in an industry where the entire collaborative workflow of everyone is based on software that doesn’t run on Linux, then not running that software is equal to not being able to work in that industry.

    there’s no denying that’s true, though ofc it has alot to do with microsofts very agreessive and anti-competitive practices.

    though its all a bit tangential, the main issue i think comes down to what someone means when they say “everything”. certainly if someone said “you can do everything”, i’d expect them to qualify what is (should be) obviously a slight exaggeration as parlance. they don’t literally mean “everything” they just mean most everyday things. i think its fairly common in everyday speech for someone to be able to work out thats what they meant.

    in the few rare cases when someone literally means absolutely everything, then yes that silly statement would be incorrect. and if strictly intended with that meaning would certainly qualify as misinformation.



  • aye exactly. since voting is apparently a big thing now, if we have to work within it, some ideas might help such as mentioned above where hackernews prevents downvoting replies to you.

    some other ideas

    • permit upvoting but downvotes require a textbox reply (imo downvoting without a valid explanation is just noise, and we want signal over noise right?)

    • self posts not being upvoted (all posts start at 0)

    • i really like how lemmy shows both up & down rather than final value on alot of sites

    • no voting until you ‘earn your stripes’. not perfect, but somewhat helps at keeping voting within domain expertise.

    eg. i ‘fucking love science’, but just because an answer feels nice to me on nuclear rocket surgery doesn’t mean my vote should count. let alone be equal to someone with expertise


  • how so?

    check here for some basic examples. eg. it can be used to leak info from one context to another.

    there’s ofc legit uses for it too, which is why i argue for user intervention.

    chromium based browsers behave like that if I’m not mistaken

    i may be wrong? but my understanding is they’ll currently limit resources, but execution still takes place? that’s definitely useful, but my argument is for for an option where CPU resources be limited to 0 in background (without user intervention).


  • ganymede@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlWe chose... poorly
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Yeah I don’t know. Just see how the modern world is shaping society to the negative I just don’t see where we are close to utopia But right now we are on a different path

    That was essentially a big part of my point. We could be close to a utopia by now (from the perspective of technological possibilities).

    Instead, as I said

    for some suspicious reason we took a very different road, and here we are

    That said I don’t currently believe technology itself is inherently bad.

    Like all tools, it depends what you do with it.

    Is a general purpose tool like hammer good or bad? It has the capacity for both. And therefore it’s up to the user which is which.

    And that’s the issue really, what are we doing with our wonderous technology?

    This might be a bit of a radical take. But in that ~125 year window i was refering to, alot of machines we’ve invented are actually weapons.

    Weapons to destroy eachother physically (conflict/threats of violence etc).

    Weapons to destroy nature (deforestation and probably most mining).

    Weapons to destroy the mind (social media etc, actually most media now).

    What if we’d had 1+¼ century of building a collective utopia instead of all these weapons?

    afaict from the technical perspective it’s not really unfeasible, its the non-technical problem: the user and what they use the tools for.

    Another clue for us is probably the term appropriate technology, which is a vibe i think eg. solar punk is helping to cultivate.

    Anyway we’ve done ALOT of misuse. That’s why i don’t blame technology itself.

    I still think it’s more about what we’ve done with it.


  • background/defocused tabs are ‘paused’ by default.

    paused meaning no runtime execution of scripts or anything else.

    firstly, there’s always some security and plenty of privacy mischief around focus.

    secondly, it’s almost always wasting cycles, so its just wasteful of resources and energy.

    ofc with some option for you to eg. right-click on a tab and mark it as ‘runtime in background’ or something, for webmail or messengers etc which you do want runtime.

    but it should essentially be whitelisted.

    i’ve actually played with this in the firefox debugger and it essentially appears feasible so really hope this feature comes oneday - or i finally get some time to look into making an addon for it.


  • probably an unpopular view but tbh i think voting has ruined modern forums

    firstly its much much easier to game, and for big platforms to fake

    but more to the point, voting makes excellent sense when the topic is something with a clearly provable right/wrong answer. eg. technical questions are ideal for voting, where the wrong information does belong at the bottom because its simply wrong and in most cases most people can easily verify if it works or doesn’t work.

    instead we get voting for everything now, so it merely becomes a poll of opinions not facts, but unfortunately our monkey brains sees the numbers and somewhat equates emotions with facts.

    oldschool forums ALREADY HAD a poll feature, so when we wanted a poll we could get one. now everything is a poll, and when everything is a poll nothing is especially meaningful.



  • ganymede@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlWe chose... poorly
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    necessary decline in our quality of life

    i’m not refuting your core premise.

    but on the note of this issue, not sure i can agree.

    have a look at this public infrastructure technology from 122 years ago:

    Youtube/Invidious

    imagine if we’d spent the last 1+¼ century collectively working towards the utopia this kind of project hinted at - instead of developing new machines to destroy?

    typically they say utopian dreams scatter in the face of increased technological awareness. have to say my experience has been the opposite.

    the more i learn about technology, the more i realise we could probably be very close to a near-utopia by now. for some suspicious reason we took a very different road, and here we are.




  • seems roughly accurate.

    but probably would add

    the mayor is a good person, and genuinely appears to want to see the best in people. but most of the reported incidents involve thugs with overt connections to an organised crime syndicate which is currently so powerful they mostly don’t have to answer to anyone.

    the same crime syndicate has been granted the contract to light the field, cut the grass and keep everyone safe.

    the mayor has a fairly good record of delivering on good community projects. so on the one hand mayor has a good rep, on the other…it’s an organised crime syndicate who is literally one of the worst offenders when it comes to making the field unsafe in the first place.


  • That’s wrong. The creation of PPA isn’t about getting paid

    ok that’s fair, thanks for the useful info i didn’t know that. until money or other resources change hands i’m happy to withdraw the view that while firefox is underfunded by the community, it may not have resulted in these kinds of collaborations.

    what i’m not understanding is how average non-adblock running users will be better off?

    i appreciate you’ve stated how the sole purpose of this collaboration is intended by mozilla.

    yet unlike the current implementation which appears to be opt-out, afaict meta’s particpation here is entirely opt-in, isn’t it? if meta etc decide on a whim they want to have their cake and eat it too, what is stopping them?


  • imo we’re all lacking innocence, regardless of using adblockers or not. we all, myself included, haven’t funded mozilla fairly for FF.

    even if viewing ads for a website was an ethically sound exchange (in principle? probably achievable; in modern implementations? highly debatable),

    regardless, that revenue is naturally for the sites not for the browser. maintaining a modern browser requires non-trivial resources, alot of us get hours/day from our browsers, advertisers are getting paid, and meanwhile ff has been missing out.

    i could be wrong, but my gut feeling is mozilla is (mostly) a legit organisation with genuine good interests at heart. and if we’d all donated even a fraction of what its genuinely worth, they probably wouldn’t have to make these kinds of faustian deals.

    giving advertisers enough to leave innocent people alone

    I think this is very optimistic, the ad industry has virtually zero incentive to play fairly here. afaict they’ve currently got it far too good to have any genuine motivation to make concessions?

    if i had to guess, one of the biggest actual threats on their horizon is somehow maintaining s̶u̶f̶f̶i̶c̶i̶e̶n̶t̶ infinite growth, which is further reason for them to NOT be satisfied with an equivalent or lesser scope than they already have right now.

    imo its not a matter if but when it will be discovered meta’s behaved in bad faith here. i could be wrong, and hopefully i am because it would ofc philosophically be a step in the right direction.