I have tinkered with Gemini on occasion, and while there are stubborn adherents, it’s not super intuitive to use. Not sure why it can’t be beautiful and simple. Maybe it can’t?
I think a standard like this proposed would make it far easier for browsers for older tech to be developed, used, and maintained. That would be a massive win.
And in addition to security and privacy concerns, the less that a browser actually needs to do, the better for us all.
This is deeply disturbing. The terrible, incoherent messaging and strategy around the Iran war (unapproved by Congress) is connected. This is an administration that is seeking less freedom, not more. What entity would sue on behalf of the ombudsman?
Democratic leadership are also all Zionists who not-so-secretly approved of the war, which is why they stalled the war powers vote until after he attacked.
But if Republicans are Zionists, and Democrats are too, what hope is there for peace in the Middle East?
I can understand that Israel's long-time strategy is to keep all their neighborhood in a state of permanent mess so that nobody is strong enough to be an existential threat. But after almost a century, it's clear this is not working.
A US president does not have authority to start a war, Congress has, according to Constitution. The president only serves as a Commander in Chief.
So at any point Congress can stop any military action issuing an immediate ruling preventing the president doing anything. If our congressmen don't do that it means they approve it.
It's our, USA, war, not Trump's war. Because we elected the congressmen.
As far as I understand the US president is not a king that governs by decree, there's a whole other branch of government also elected to represent the will of the people, a branch where negotiations, debates, voting takes place to determine how the country should be.
People voted for Trump which had as one of its key promises during election "no more wars", perhaps it's ok that the another branch of government stop something which people didn't vote for?
How come this logic does not apply to democratic politicians? Why is it that them winning election by small margin does not imply that everything they do is good and legit for conservative people like you?
People who didn't vote are effectively votes for whoever wins. All the non-voters need to be counted towards Trump's victory number. It's a huge majority.
I voted for Harris but I live in North Dakota, so because of the electoral college, my vote didn't count. I'll be voting 3rd party for all presidential elections from now on
Citation needed. You lot elected him before, seems likely you elected him again. Pretended he won by cheating instead of because your democracy is in dire need of a refit will do little but alloallow the next facists to win as well.
Not OP. I believe it is from folks like this. It is compelling but it can also difficult to pin down the exact details. They rely mostly on statistics based oddities.
I do appreciate that they are not interested in over throwing the 2024 election, just ensure that any possible gaps are covered for future elections.
> The Election Truth Alliance is initiating a call for hand counts of paper voting records associated with the 2024 U.S. General Election, and is advocating for full hand counts prior to certification for all future U.S. elections.
Congress voted to stop counting days to allow the tariffs to keep going without having to actually act on it! Congress overruled time passing. These people are fundamentally breakers of reality, aren't just unserious: they are anti serious. RFK and all of this is a perpetrated act to be grossly anti reality, to defy all reason. No reality supports any of what's happening, there's no reality where any of that GOP agenda can win, so they have declared war on reality. https://www.ntu.org/publications/detail/congress-should-not-...
This stopped being alternate realities a while ago, as it became a collective project to form anti-realities.
It's not genocide to stop handouts to the third world. It's genocide to go around murdering white farmers in mass to take their land, as is happening now in South Africa and previously happened in Zimbabwe.
The Germans owned the holocaust because they lost WW2 and afterwards became a vassal state of the Allies and later just the US. History is written by the victors.
The Germans "owned" the holocaust because the Nazis (German) started, conducted, and maintained the systematic collection, extermination, and destruction of certain classes of the population under their control.
I assume the point is that what make them acknowledge and repent from what they did is that they lost the war.
Many massacres and genocides are "owner-less" and obscured by history. To give a few exemple, you might find, but the trail of tears is not as front-and-center in US' history teaching as the holocaust is in German history teaching.
You'll find similar situations for all colonial powers who didn't get dismantled and forced to accept their wrongs after losing a war. You may even go as far as to say that Germany is the outlier here.
Thank God human beings who spend money on these resources are left to fend for themselves. Imagine if we spent good money on a flight, and now the company winds down its operations even as we are on route to our destination. Since we are just a number, I supposed we should simply cease to exist or occupy a liminal space. Or maybe... we could be treated as a human being?
I'm guessing you misinterpreted my comment to assert that we should provide no consumer protections. That was not what I was saying. I'm talking pancakes, you're talking waffles.
How we treat capital and how we treat humans should not be connected to each other, and it's absolutely important that capital not be treated as if it were a person. Corporations are not humans, and we can not bail out investors while we let consumers flail. And we should never bail out corporations under the premise of helping humans, when direct assistance to humans would suffice.
I am so grateful for this announcement. In a time when gas prices are high, Spirit should be the kind of capitalist example that dominates. Instead, it goes bankrupt despite the President trying to nationalize it. Thanks be to the God of money.
If you are a tech guy and working with drones or any AI company that has even a bare relationship to some security firm, you have a few options:
1 - Immediately share all information and intel with the public so as to spare any judicial accountability.
2 - Quit.
3 - Prepare to go to jail for the rest of your life. This is profoundly evil.
That presumes that “killer AI drones” are a valid way to accomplish some valid goal.
For example, I do in fact want to live in a world where only the bad guys have child soldiers, use human shields, deliberately target civilians, and abuse prisoners of war.
Do not succumb to "we have to win the race" reasoning and escalation, when the race is leading off a cliff. It is, in fact, possible to stop things via international cooperation. Treat it the way we do nuclear proliferation. (Efforts to stop nuclear proliferation have not been perfect, but they've been incredibly effective and made it much more difficult to make the problem worse than it already is.)
I suppose in the context of the article you're commenting on you're saying the bad people are the ones defending the women and children from being raped?
A permanent, non-negligible chance of becoming a collateral victim in an extrajudicial drone killing doesn't sound like order to me.
TFA mentions residents are very scared. They live in a war zone.
Edit: I get the argument that it was a war zone anyway and people are also afraid of the gangs. But that comes from the fallacy of seeing the drone strikes as the only option. There are better ways to create order than creating even more chaos and hope it hits the right people sometimes.
Haiti has been a shit show for like 200 years now. You don’t think they’ve tried every method they can think of to deal with the criminals? What are the better methods to deal with chaos that they have been ignoring?
This is why I come to this site. Some of the tech stuff goes over my head and limited skills, but this article was insightful and still so relevant. It probably applies to non-profit organizations that tend to falter after their visionary (aka psychopath) leader retires.
And it likely applies to a ton of churches out there, especially megachurches, where you walk in to the lobby and see leadership books by their star CEO aka pastor about leadership or life lessons or whatever. But those megachurches churn through employees until they find just enough psychopaths (aka executive pastors) willing to be assholes for God, plenty of clueless who are happy to serve as that middle management, and then those who are okay with being loyal and doing just enough week to week for a paycheck.
I've seen it all too often.
Check out the podcast Bodies Behind the Bus if you want a glimpse about what happens to those who actually call some of those megachurches to live into what they say - like actually caring for their neighbors.
I don't like to paint Apple as being completely incompetent (but damn have they been screwing stuff up), but I do think trying to solidify the experiences around a common codebase has become untenable. The idea is great thought - write one app that works on macOS, iPadOS, iPhoneOS, visionOS, etc. What a time saver that is for developers - but the problem is that screen sizes and interactions with those different platforms vary. Yes, resizing a window with your clunky finger needs a bit more wriggle room, while a pixel precise mouse or touchpad is a lot different.
I am a diehard Apple fan. I stuck with Apple through the dreadful 90s and fought for their relevance as a needed computing alternative in education spaces. I extolled their virtues. I hung on until Steve Jobs took over and helped things improve... quite drastically, in fact. I could never have imagined the widespread celebration of the hardware with the m series of chips. Quite an achievement.
But even now, I acknowledge the latest macOS release is dreadful. Just absolutely dreadful.
And the fix is easy - hire new young talent. Hire kids out of college. Bring in fresh faces who are going to speak the truth, who are hungry to make it better. Listen to them and do what they say.
I love the idea of this... but here is what I want - IT SHOULD WORK WITH EVERY HARDWARE PERMUTATION KNOWN TO EXISTENCE. If not... combine your energy with Fedora.
I do not agree with the parent, however the first part of your objection is not really valid. Red Hat were able to ditch Centos because they owned it. You canbase something independent on RH.
What drives me personally nuts about the CentOS saga is all the “community” hand-waving about creating a bit for bit clone of a distro.
There can be no “community just shipping builds of RHEL code as, by definition, you cannot change anything. That means you cannot contribute. In my view, an Open Source “community” cannot just be people that use things for free. It is supposed to be about collaborating to build things.
At least now we have Alma Linux which strives to be ABI compatible with RHEL but builds it themselves from CentOS Stream. They actually build something. They can actually contribute (and they do). They can innovate. For example, they have continued the x86-64v2 builds even though RHEL has abandoned them. On Alma, you can at least claim to be building a community.
I do not use any of these distros by the way, in case you think I am shilling something.
It warms my heart to see someone else recognize this. The bug-for-bug model that classic CentOS Linux followed was fundamentally broken. Sure there were lots of consumers, but without the ability to fix bugs or accept contributions it was dysfunctional. The underlying motivation of the CentOS Stream changes was resolving this conflict, so that bugs can be fixed and contributions can be merged, resulting in a more sustainable distro.
I have tinkered with Gemini on occasion, and while there are stubborn adherents, it’s not super intuitive to use. Not sure why it can’t be beautiful and simple. Maybe it can’t?
I think a standard like this proposed would make it far easier for browsers for older tech to be developed, used, and maintained. That would be a massive win.
And in addition to security and privacy concerns, the less that a browser actually needs to do, the better for us all.
But it feels like a pipe dream?
reply