• 1 Post
  • 257 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle
  • Do you use autocomplete? AI in some of the various ways that’s being posited is just spicy autocomplete. You can run a pretty decent local AI on SSE2 instructions alone.

    Now you don’t have to accept spicy-autocomplete just like you don’t have to accept plain jane-autocomplete. The choice is yours, Mozilla isn’t planning on spinning extra cycles in your CPU or GPU if you don’t want them spun.

    But I distinctly remember the grumbles when Firefox brought local db ops into the browser to give it memory for forms. Lots of people didn’t like the notion of filling out a bank form or something and then that popping into a sqlite db.

    So, your opinion, I don’t blame you. I don’t agree with your opinion, but I don’t blame you. Completely normal reaction. Don’t let folks tell you different. Just like we need the gas pedal for new things, we need the brake as well. I would hate to see you go and leave Firefox, BUT I would really hate you having to feel like something was forced upon you and you just had to grin and bear it.



  • Yeah, I think that’s the bigger issue here. These devices pay their way by collecting data to sell off. What this “overhual” is indicating is that they haven’t quite figured out how to make these devices not only pay for themselves, but also, generate a net background profit for the company.

    The only thing I’m reading from this story is that Amazon is just aiming for more dollar signs from Alexia. I’m going tell you in the day and age of Siri and Whatever Google’s thing is, this is going to backfire massively on Amazon. This will likely collapse whatever paltry Alexia that’s out there. And I have a good feeling they’ll look at this collapse as “well the technology just isn’t a good money maker.” No you idiots, it’s not a mass profit driver. I get how something not drawing double digit percentage gains is a mystery to you all, but just because you cannot buy your fifteenth yacht from it, doesn’t mean that the technology is a failure.

    But it’s whatever, Amazon’s ship to wreck.







  • IHeartBadCode@kbin.socialtoMemes@lemmy.mlI guess I'm doing my part
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    149
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Yes I saw some shit the other day about, “such and such reporting that sales are drastically down since blah blah blah. Where did it all go wrong?”

    Or “Gen whatever is choosing to part ways with blah blah blah. Here’s our guesses as to why!”

    And it’s just, NOBODY HAS FUCKING MONEY!!! That’s it. That’s all it is. There’s no preference. There’s no secret wokeness. There’s no underlying meaning. We are all just fucking broke!

    They took all the money, they refuse to give it back in wages, they jacked up the price, and we are tapping out. HOW THE FUCK IS THIS STILL A GODDAMN MYSTERY?!?!?!

    The only way someone can still be confused about what’s going on is if they’re on purpose being ignorant about it because, “mah market indicators!”

    We are all broke. That’s it, that’s the answer. Media needs to stop with the bullshit. The headline every day needs to be “The world is on fire by rich asshats and the rest of us are too fucking broke to do anything. We are all going to die painfully because of those rich asshats.” And that should be all that’s on the news every hour on the hour. The end.


  • And just so we’re clear, I’m not saying everything Leah said is golden. Humans are human and say things that don’t jive 100% of the time. It’s entirely possible for something to have both folks handle a situation in a manner that is less than ideal. All I’m indicating is for you to step back for a second. It will absolutely help you out here.

    Ideally you can perhaps look at this from Leah’s point of view. But that’s solely up to you. Best thing for you though is to just bring it down a notch. That’s the only thing that I’m pretty sure is a good idea right now. What’s past that, I think only you can best determine that. But I honestly think some deep breaths are what’s immediately needed.

    I’m pretty sure post that you’ll have it handled. And I don’t know how old you are but I’ll say that panicked hyping a situation only gets worse as you age. So developing ways to deal with it is just part of growing up for 30 to 50 year olds. This notion that we’re done “growing” at some magical number is bunk.

    I had my car start stuttering on the highway once and thought for sure that I was going to die. My brain just spiraled a situation where I needed to just pull over and see what was wrong into a flight or fight response. Ultimately, it was just a loose hose and I fixed it. But for a moment there I was panicking myself way past a point of being reasonable.

    It just happens and sometimes we just need to force ourselves to take a pause. That’s all the advice I think I can give you here. I think once you chill for a bit, you’re smart enough to figure out the what’s next part.


  • when I was really just frustrated

    Buddy that all reads as harassing. The IRC logs are especially a bad look for you, because you said:

    im looking to add this board to my resume

    And now that entire chat log is tied to it.

    I’m not sure why you thought hounding someone and harping about it for nearly eight hours on IRC was a good idea. But now you’ve come to the Fediverse to find some absolution or something.

    You can be frustrated, that’s fine, but when that frustration turns into that long of a hanging on the bell that’s evident in that chat log and then two hours later you came here with this, that is past frustration.

    Leah also indicated:

    if i give in to you now, you will try to harass/abuse me again in the future.

    And Leah has a point. You’ve shown no sign of taking a moment to collect yourself. I get you are upset. Sometimes the best way to handle upset is to just shut up for a day or two. And trust me, I struggle with doing that myself.

    Like everything you’ve done in your frustration, I’ve been down that road. And I’m pretty sure in your head you are telling yourself, but the difference is that… because that’s exactly what I’d say to someone telling me this. That my situation is different somehow and that I must rectify this injustice immediately!

    and if it was bullying, I apologize then.

    What you need to do is two things. One, learn from this so that in the future you can do… Two, chill out. I think you’ll find in more professional environments sorry is okay, but I have learned from my mistakes and will do better is more preferred.

    This whole thing could have been max three messages on IRC. “Why wasn’t I credited? What was wrong with my submission? How do I improve going forward?” The end.

    I think the biggest thing here for me is that in open projects, leads are fielding multiple people and working on their stuff. Every message you send is “Hey stop what you are doing and pay attention to me!” So you really want to be respectful of their time by really trying to be succinct on whatever is bugging you.

    And you are on the contrib page.

    All round good guy, an honest and loyal fan.

    And I think you’re wondering how “testing” vs “developed” looks on your resume? But that chat log is now going to be front and center no matter what’s said on the contrib page. It really doesn’t matter if you got “developed” pasted on the contrib page.

    All of this Mastodon interactions and IRC logs isn’t a good look. It’s not the end of the world. I think everyone has felt frustration like this before, like there’s some magical set of words to say that’ll fix everything. But you’ve got to let it go. You’re just digging down with posts like this. And you don’t have to let it go forever, just you’ve really added a lot of friction to have this go surface of the sun warm. You need to let it cool, come back refreshed, and maybe see if you can repair the relationship you have with the team.

    But you’ve got to understand. Your post here paints one picture and your interactions with Leah on Mastodon and IRC are something else. And that difference between the is especially not good as it comes off as a lot of sour and bitterness on this “slight” that you perceived as such an injustice.

    And hell’s bells. If you sit on this for seventy-two hours and you still feel massively wronged, go fork you a project and call it FOSSITboot or whatever and show everyone your prowess. If you’ve got skills to pay the bills, then if you build it they will come.

    Lots of love for you, but just take a moment from everything. I assure you, it’ll do you wonders to decompress.


  • I just want to note here for those about to journey into this conversation, there’s a major hiccup that didn’t exist before. The Supreme Court placed an new expansive interpretation of the Second Amendment in the 2008 Heller case. This has significantly altered how the second amendment is read in the United States. So what may seem like “brain dead easy” things to do, likely cannot be done as they would be unconstitutional.

    I say this because the question posed simply indicates “Present + Congress” which seems to imply, “which laws would you pass to fix gun control issues” and post-2008 that is no longer a thing. Any discussion needs to include at this point a conversation about the Supreme Court, the new understanding of the 2nd Amendment, and that the Justices currently on the bench will likely enforce their new expansive interpretation for their term on the court (which is a lifetime appointment).

    We are now at a point that we cannot fix this issue without a Constitutional Amendment, a reorganization of the Supreme Court (packing, impeachment, etc), an incredibly careful tip-toe around this new understanding of the second amendment, and/or talking about the underlying issues that surround gun reform (economic and societal issues).

    And we are seeing the consequences of Heller in things like 2022 Bruen which SCOTUS indicated that a “historic standard” should be applied to new gun regulation. This has lead to US v Rahimi where the Court of Appeals for 5th Circuit has removed the Federal protection that folks charged with domestic violence can still obtain a gun as “domestic violence” had no historical standard on which to base on. Which is an absolute astonishing level of logic there.

    We are no longer at a phase where legislation alone along the strict lines of “just gun reform”, this new understanding of the second amendment has forever (or at least as long as those Justices sit the bench) altered how we can approach this issue. We cannot just simply say, “let us figure out ways to regulate gun ownership in itself” that is no longer allowed. We can approach the issue indirectly: how do we increase the cost of Interstate gun ownership, how do we regulate the the dissemination of ammunition, how do we address the various issues that draw people into violent crime, how do we address the issue of school shootings at an societal level. But we have been cut off from direct approaches that regulate guns themselves except in the most extreme cases and even then, advocates are continually being handed new tools by the Supreme Court to bring about new challenges for those.

    Any meaningful debate about gun control needs to include the Supreme Court. Because given the current Court’s propensity to expand gun rights and the understanding of the second amendment, any law that might get introduced to fix the issue today, could and very likely would be overturned by the court. This has become a new chess piece in this game to be considered since 2008, prior yes this could have been a Congress and President issue alone, but post-2008, the Courts must be considered in the discussion. The Supreme Court too strongly embraces the new understanding of the second amendment to let any direct law be allowed to go unchallenged.


  • It absolutely could. Heck, RPMs and DEBs pulled from random sites can do the exact same thing as well. Even source code can hide something if not checked. There’s even a very famous hack presented by Ken Thompson in 1984 that really speaks to the underlying thing, “what is trust?”

    And that’s really what this gets into. The means of delivery change as the years go by, but the underlying principal of trust is the thing that stays the same. In general, Canonical does review somewhat apps published to snapcraft. However, that review does not mean you are protected and this is very clearly indicated within the TOS.

    14.1 Your use of the Snap Store is at your sole risk

    So yeah, don’t load up software you, yourself, cannot review. But also at the same time, there’s a whole thing of trust here that’s going to need to be reviewed. Not, “Oh you can never trust Canonical ever again!” But a pretty straightforward systematic review of that trust:

    • How did this happen?
    • Where was this missed in the review?
    • How can we prevent this particular thing that allowed this to happen in the future?
    • How do we indicate this to the users?
    • How do we empower them to verify that such has been done by Canonical?

    No one should take this as “this is why you shouldn’t trust Ubuntu!” Because as you and others have said, this could happen to anyone. This should be taken as a call for Canonical to review how they put things on snapcraft and what they can do to ensure users have all the tools so that they can ensure “at least for this specific issue” doesn’t happen again. We cannot prevent every attack, but we can do our best to prevent repeating the same attack.

    It’s all about building trust. And yeah, Flathub and AppImageHub can, and should, take a lesson from this to preemptively prevent this kind of thing from happening there. I know there’s a propensity to wag the finger in the distro wars, tribalism runs deep, but anything like this should be looked as an opportunity to review that very important aspect of “trust” by all. It’s one of the reasons open source is very important, so that we can all openly learn from each other.



  • US Military (NATO) moving closer to Russia was a provacation that started decades ago

    Because Russia during the Soviet era gave Europe every reason to believe the Russian desire to return to 1850s borders. Which that was distinctly something that wasn’t going to happen because it would prompt the exact same situation that begat World War I.

    So yeah. Duh! After World War II one would think that “oh let’s finish this as oppose to leaving it hang like we did in WWI” would be something of paramount importance. Much to the chagrin of Russia who thought that they’d get a nice fat cut of the spoils with Germany’s defeat. Surprise the other two members of the Alliance wanted to kind of go the other direction and dismantle colonial Europe and Africa. That’s why Africa post WWII became, well, what it is mostly today.

    NATO and the response thereafter has been to ensure independent nations within Europe. Russia has wanted to revive the “glory days” of the Muscovy. So you tell me, who’s being provocative of who? Russia is still angry they didn’t get a lion’s share of Europe post-WWII seeing how they sent the most lives to die in the war, and the US was tired of having to deal with Europe every so often and isolationism just wasn’t fucking working.

    Have you seen that we have 800+ military bases outside of the US

    Yeah have you also seen the UK’s or France’s? Note anything about those countries and who’s who in WWII? Russia still wants that good old colonialism. I’m mean you need no further evidence of such than Crimea, or Russia’s attitude towards Georgia, or we we can keep going on and on.

    Now. The other guys UK/France/US, see they have moved on to, let’s call it economic colonialism. Now the Nation doesn’t technically have foreign governments dictating policy per se, but they use the allure of the dollar to ensure there’s a bias towards being friendly. Is it a better system? It’s pros and cons. It’s sort of how Russia attempts to play that same game with Baltic nations and energy, to which they’re abjectly losing on that front. US kind of top tiered the banking industry early in the game, which pros and cons to that too (see Housing Crisis and how US banks can bring down the world’s economy).

    But the point being is the military bases that being an argument for… What? There’s an economic investment that a lot of nations have put in, Russia included, why do you think they have bases in Libya and Sudan? Why do you think Turkey has the relationship it does with Russia even though it’s an EU member?

    Our US politicians/military would need to be for negotations, which they are not for, at least majority are not.

    Putin doesn’t want to negotiate. Just full stop. There is a projection of strength that Putin has to maintain to keep the level of support he has. The second he says “Oopsie! I guess I got a lot of our fellow citizens killed for no reason.” Is the second his key supporters turn on his ass.

    endless wars that are pushed for profits

    Who do you think is pushing Putin? You keep going on and on about the rich in the US, you keep forgetting rich assholes are the world around. Until the entire planet gathers around for Kumbaya and unites to destroy greed, guess what we’re going to have to deal with? It’s not a unique US issue, everyone likes to think that the US has some sort of monopoly on rich asshats, they do not. Putin has territorial aspirations and the rich are looking to profit from that desire. So don’t give me this crap that only rich US fuckers want war in perpetuity. There are rich shitheads in every country looking to provoke their nation du jour into some conflict that potentially enriches them. It’s just fun to punch on the US versions of them because the US has a lot of them, with the whole banking system being as it is. But they’re everywhere, Russia included.

    You seem to be going on and on about wars and rich people and I’ve got no complaint there, but how the fuck does that even fit into your “Oh NATO be provocating!!” Russia be doing it too. “Oh rich people just want to profit!!” Russia has that same fucking problem. I’m not seeing your argument for why the US and Russia aren’t exactly what I just said.

    if person A is acting shitty and person B is acting shitty, why are you expecting non-shitty behavior to come from either?

    Your commentary on rich vs poor, yeah cool. What’s that got to do with the price of tea in China? Russia wants it’s land, taking all that land would set us up exactly like what led to World War I. That, to me, does not seem like a good idea to let happen. Russia needs to fucking chill. NATO gets to stay because Europe needs integration not separation. The latter just keeps leading to global conflict, which seems less than ideal to most people.


  • Putin is much more than a boogeyman because, as is currently on demonstration, he follows through on his desire to conquer.

    It’s fun to say boogeyman because it attempts to put our current events as infantile. But Putin is indeed marching in Ukraine, so he’s distinctly NOT a boogeyman when he’s actually doing that whole war thing.

    pushing for endless wars

    The wars can end on that front the second Putin decides to go home.

    As for the US military industrial complex, cool, we can have that conversation when fucksticks in Russia are no longer acting like fucksticks. But they’ve sorta been doing that whole being a giant douche since WWII ended.

    That’s not to justify America’s shitty logic, but to point out if person A is acting shitty and person B is acting shitty, why are you expecting non-shitty behavior to come from either?

    So it’s endless wars until BOTH countries stop collectively being shitty. Which that’s kind of hard when Putin gets a continual erection from being shitty to Europe.

    So you tell Vlad when he’s ready to stop buttering his nipples on making sure Europe live their lives in continued fear and inflated energy prices, we can talk about that whole endless war thing.



  • Hey OP, I think you’re focusing on specific use cases of broader issues.

    Globally speaking, energy is about 25% of all CO₂ emitted into the air. Farming and agriculture is another 25%. Industry is 20% and transportation is about 15%. So in just those four categories we’re talking about 85% of all CO₂ emitted.

    So when you indicate:

    We have semi trucks burning diesel to bring pet food and pet supplies to all parts of the world.

    That’s transportation.

    We devote some amount of farm land and livestock to feeding those pets

    That’s farming.

    We have big box stores for pets

    That’s both energy (for power) and industry (concrete).

    So I just wanted to point that out. Now I also wanted to address something else.

    It’s interesting when people suggest to reduce global human population

    Rich people suggest this and poor people think it sounds good because they believe that the reduction is not including themselves. We have a TON of resources on this planet. We just do not have enough resources on this planet for the current distribution system. That’s the key point here.

    Population reduction should be viewed in the same manner on how humanity did the horse population reduction. The second we invented the car, horses were no longer useful, so we got rid of a ton of them. As we continue to progress in technology, we render a lot of people no longer useful through no fault of their own. So there’s a few folk out there recommending we do the same to them as we did horses.

    Now where that lies on your ethical meter, you know, I’m not here to judge. Humanity is a spunky bunch. But just remember that the folks indicating population decline as a viable answer, if you’re not pulling eight or nine figures a year, you’re in that group up for consideration for culling.

    But back to your point. I mean the pet thing is indeed an interesting take on the four factors of climate change. Indeed an interesting take on them for sure. I don’t have hard numbers on the CO₂ emissions for pet ownership, but they do indeed contribute to the big four. I cannot imagine that they account for a single percent of any of the big four’s underlying values. 900 million dogs do sound like a lot but it’s actually pretty small in terms of footprint on the environment. The big thing is that the vast majority of those dogs globally are not living high CO₂ producing lives. Just a few of them are. Same with cats. The vast majority are feral beasts. Wrecking diversity of various ecological areas for sure, but not exactly producing massive amounts of CO₂.

    Which ecological impact is something that’s a different topic than climate change but the two do sometimes overlap each other. But they are two different studies at the end of the day.




  • Impeachment is not a legal process, it is a political process

    Literally says this in the Constitution.

    Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

    — Article I, Section 3, Clause 7 paragraph 1 US Constitution.

    And this extends from historical basis that in days of yore political power was granted from a liege to a vassal on fief. But there existed the ability for political power to be withdrawn, a person struck from their liege’s court, and that would in turn automatically have them lose any title to their fief. That is a loss of political power could also mean a complete loss of your way of life.

    The US wanted a clear barrier between political career and personal liberty. This is why Santos is still a free man even though he got kicked out of the House (though that might change soon enough). The two are different processes and they mean different things. Just like if Trump goes to jail but hasn’t been disqualified, he’s entirely able to run for office.