That’s generally not what they’re really concerned about. “I don’t want teachers teaching my children to be gay” is just code for, “I don’t want teachers teaching my children that it’s ok to be gay.”
Whenever any advance is made in AI, AI critics redefine AI so its not achieved yet according to their definition. Deep Blue Chess was an AI, an artificial intelligence. If you mean human or beyond level general intelligence, you’re probably talking about AGI or ASI (general or super intelligence, respectively).
And the second comment about LLMs being parrots arises from a misunderstanding of how LLMs work. The early chatbots were actual parrots, saying prewritten sentences that they had either been preprogrammed with or got from their users. LLMs work differently, statistically predicting the next token (roughly equivalent to a word) based on all those that came before it, and parameters finetuned during training. Their temperature can be changed to give more or less predictable output, and as such, they have the potential for actually original output, unlike their parrot predecessors.
Whenever any advance is made in AI, AI critics redefine AI so its not achieved yet according to their definition.
That stems from the fact that AI is an ill-defined term that has no actual meaning. Before Google maps became popular, any route finding algorithm utilizing A* was considered “AI”.
And the second comment about LLMs being parrots arises from a misunderstanding of how LLMs work.
LLMs reproduce the form of language without any meaning being transmitted. That’s called parroting.
Even if (and that’s a big if) an AGI is going to be achieved at some point, there will be people calling it parroting by that definition. That’s the Chinese room argument.
And the argument was if there’s meaning behind what they generate. That argument applies to AGIs too. It’s a deeply debated philosophical question. What is meaning? Is our own thought pattern deterministic, and if it is, how do we know there’s any meaning behind our own actions?
LLMs work differently, statistically predicting the next token (roughly equivalent to a word) based on all those that came before it, and parameters finetuned during training.
Yeah this is the exact criticism. They recombine language pieces without really doing language. The end result looks like language, but it lacks any of the important characteristics of language such as meaning and intention.
If I say “Two plus two is four” I am communicating my belief about mathematics.
If an llm emits “two plus two is four” it is outputting a stochastically selected series of tokens linked by probabilities derived from training data. If the statement is true or false then that is accidental.
If i train an LLM to do math, for the training data i generate a+b=cstatements, never showing it the same one twice.
It would be pointless for it to “memorize” every single question and answer it gets since it would never see that question again. The only way it would be able to generate correct answers would be if it gained a concept of what numbers are, and how the add operation operates on them to create a new number.
Rather than memorizing and parroting it would have to actually understand it in order to generate responses.
It’s called generalization, it’s why large amounts of data is required (if you show the same data again and again then memorizing becomes a viable strategy)
If I say “Two plus two is four” I am communicating my belief about mathematics.
Seems like a pointless distinction, you were told it so you believe it to be the case? Why can’t we say the LLM outputs what it believes is the correct answer? You’re both just making some statement based on your prior experiences which may or may not be true
You’re arguing against a position I didn’t put forward. Also
Seems like a pointless distinction, you were told it so you believe it to be the case? Why can’t we say the LLM outputs what it believes is the correct answer? You’re both just making some statement based on your prior experiences which may or may not be true
This is what excessive reduction does to a mfer. That is just such a hysterically absurd take.
The algorithm assigns weights to nodes in a neural network. These weights are derived by statistical association of tokens in the training data after they have been cleaned.
That is so enormously far from how we think humans learn (you don’t teach a kid to understand theory of mind by plopping them in front of the Gutenberg project and saying good luck, and yet they learn to explain theory of mind problems all the same) that it is just comically farcial to assume something similar is happening underneath.
It is very interesting that llms are able to appear to be conversational but claiming they have some sort of mind with an understanding of maths is as ridiculous as suggesting a chess bot understands the Pauli exclusion principle because it never moves two pieces into the same physical space.
You’ve been speaking with your chest this whole time and now that we’re into the nitty gritty you really just said “The ai does… something!” It’s so general a description that by your measure automated thermostats are engaging in human reasoning when they make it a little bit cooler on a hot day.
You might’ve been oversimplifying on purpose. I just can’t help but think you have no idea how LLMs work outside of this inherently flawed comparison to human thought.
Not OP, but speaking from a fairly deep layman understanding of how LLMs work - all anyone really knows is that capabilities of fundamentally higher orders (like deception, which requires theory of mind) emerged by simply training larger networks. Since we don’t have a great understanding of how our own intelligence emerges from our wetware, we’re only guessing.
Something that looks like higher order reasoning emerged from training larger networks. At the end of the day it’s still just spicy autocomplete. Theoretically you could give it a large enough dataset to “predict” almost anything with really high accuracy, but all it’s doing is pattern recognition. One could argue that that’s all humans do, but that’s getting more into philosophy and skipping a lot of nuance.
I’m not like, trying to argue with you by the way. Just having a fun time with this line of thought ^^
What makes the “spicy autocomplete” perspective incomplete is also what makes LLMs work. The “Attention is All You Need” paper that introduced attention transformers describes a type of self-awareness necessary to predict the next word. In the process of writing the next word of an essay, it navigates a 22,000-dimensional semantic space, And the similarity to the way humans experience language is more than philosophical - the advancements in LLMs have sparked a bunch of new research in neurology.
If you fine tune a LLM on math equations, odds are it won’t actually learn how to reliably solve novel problems. Just the same as it won’t become a subject matter expert on any topic, but it’s a lot harder to write simple math that “looks, but is not, correct” than it is to waffle vaguely about a topic. The idea of a LLM creating a robust model of the semantics of the text it’s trained on is, at face value, plausible; it just doesn’t seem to actually happen in practice.
It’s trained to generate what is most plausible, but with math, the only plausible response is the correct answer (assuming it has been trained on data where that has been the case)
It has access to a python interpreter and can use that to do math, but it shows you that this is happening, and it did not when i asked it.
I asked it to do another operation, this time specifying i wanted it to use an external tool, and it did
You have access to a dictionary, that doesn’t prove you’re incapable of spelling simple words on your own, like goddamn people what’s with the hate boners for ai around here
It has access to a python interpreter and can use that to do math, but it shows you that this is happening, and it did not when i asked it.
That’s not what I meant.
You have access to a dictionary, that doesn’t prove you’re incapable of spelling simple words on your own, like goddamn people what’s with the hate boners for ai around here
??? You just don’t understand the difference between a LLM and a chat application using many different tools.
You completely missed the point. The point is people have been lead to believe LLM can do jobs that humans do because the output of LLMs sounds like the jobs people do, when in reality, speech is just one small part of these jobs. It turns, reasoning is a big part of these jobs, and LLMs simply don’t reason.
AI hasn’t been redefined. For people familiar with the field it has always been a broad term meaning code that learns (and subdivided in many types of AI), and for people unfamiliar with the field it has always been a term synonymous with AGI. So when people in the former category put out a product and label it as AI, people in the latter category then run with it using their own definition.
For a long time ML had been the popular buzzword in tech and people outside the field didn’t care about it. But then Google and OpenAI started calling ML and LLMs simply “AI” and that became the popular buzzword. And when everyone is talking about AI, and most people conflate that with AGI, the results are funny and scary at the same time.
You are very skilled in the art of missing the point. LLMs can absolutely be used as chatbots, amongst other things. They are more advanced than their predecessors in this, and work in a different way. That does not stop them from being a form of artificial intelligence. Chatbots and AI are not mutually exclusive terms, the first is a subset of the second. And you may indeed be referring to AGI or ASI as AI, a misconception I addressed in my earlier comment.
I can absolutely criticize you without teaching you. No one is going to teach you 4 years of college and a decade of industry experience over a social media post so you stop lying online.
I remember buying some bits and pieces to setup my home theatre in a new house years ago, and the guy at the store tried to sell me a $100 TOSLINK cable. When I asked why a $12 cable was going for so much, he pointed out that it was the “premium” cable, to ensure the highest quality audio.
I couldn’t stop laughing. Like their special cable scrubbed the photons before sending them or something.
There’s a LOT of snake oil in the audio world. Especially home theater and home studio setups. I’m a professional audio technician, and some of the “audiophile” setups I have seen are just outright asinine.
Use balanced signal for runs over ~3 feet. Use the cheapest star-quad cable you can get, and the most basic $4 Neutrik connectors. Why? Because that album you’re using to test your “hi-fi” sound system was recorded using exactly that: Cheap ¢30/foot cable and basic Neutrik connectors.
It’s also what concert setups use. You think a concert with six combined miles of cabling is going to be paying $2000 per cable? Fuck no, they’re using the cheap shit (which was hand soldered in bulk at the warehouse workbench by their lowest paid shop tech), to run that million dollar audio system. Their money goes to the speakers, amps, and mixer; Not gold plated wire, robotic soldering, or triple insulated jackets. In double-blind tests, audiophiles can’t hear the difference between a $500 cable and a couple of plasti-dipped coat hangers twisted together.
The people who complain about digital audio also can’t tell the difference in double-blind tests. Because modern audio hardware is able to perfectly emulate old analog gear. Google the Nyquist–Shannon sampling theorem for a breakdown of how we can perfectly capture and recreate analog audio with digital equipment. Vacuum tubes were groundbreaking when they were first used. But they had a lot of issues, and have very little relevance in today’s systems. They’re prone to burning out, notoriously fragile, and can be emulated perfectly.
The Norquist-Shannon rate sampling theorem only asserts that for a given maximum frequency, you only need another other given maximum frequency of sampling to represent it.
It does not say you can “perfectly” reproduce a signal. Only that you can reproduce all fourier components of the signal that are below half your sampling rate in frequency. It perfectly does that, yes.
But the signals that only contain a finite number of frequencies all below a certain maximum frequency are abstractions used in signal theory classes for teaching that theorem, and in engineering to hit a “good enough” target, not a “perfect” target.
Any frequencies bouncing around the room at over 22 kHz are lost at least to something using the 44 kHz sampling format.
TL;DR: Norquist-Shannon lets you completely reproduce signals with finite information in them. But real life sound doesn’t have finite information in it.
Also frequencies greater than half the sampling rate aren’t lost they fold into lower frequencies unless filtered out.
But if you think it’s easiser to capture those room acoustics with analog equipment the non linear amplification and distortion of any analog system is going to change the sound just add much if not more then a good digital system.
So yeah both lose or distort the signal but digital does it in avery predictable way that can be accounted for and it does have a frequency region that it captures precisely. Analog doesn’t.
aren’t lost they fold into lower frequencies unless filtered out
If by “fold into” you mean they add noise to and hence distort the readings on the lower frequencies, that’s correct. But that just takes it further from a perfect reproduction.
I don’t disagree that there’s noise in analog signals too, limiting their information capacity. But that’s coming from the limitations of our physical implementations’ quality, no?
Fully analog tube amps do definitely produce a warmer/richer sound with less complicated things to go wrong. Artists like them because they are reliable, generally user serviceable, (usually just need to replace bad/old tubes) and makes each recording sound relatively unique.
The thing is, is that it really only works during production. Unless being cut direct to a master record, the sound will get saved in a digital format to produce the user-facing media, which can include digital-source vinyls.
Those products marketed to audiophiles try to take the digitally recorded/archived products to “try” making it sound like the original.
Fucking Toslink: one round optical fiber in the middle, but it plugs in in only one position out of four, and you can’t feel which way the female connector is. EU should fine the assholes responsible.
Yes. I have a love-hate relationship with those people, as someone that does unrelated analog electrical stuff. On the one hand, it’s kinda cool that somebody made these crazy parts (and found someone dumb enough to pay for it). On the other, no that’s not what my search was about.
Internet accelerator software is not. Once you use IDM or XDM, you cannot go back to regular single threaded downloading. They are also download managers and provide a ton of useful functions.
Also essential oils are not snake oil. They are infinitely superior to the chemical deodorant crap we are accustomed to using. Although I do not know what purpose you mean by it is snake oil.
When they are talking about essential oils, they are talking about the peddling Karens and Staceys that consume overpriced lavender oil and shit with every meal and also put it into the food of their kids. And then wonder why their kid exhibits sings of certain poisoning and hives.
Western women apparently seem to consume it, and even make kids consume it, according to some comments in this thread. It is wild to hear something as dumb as this happens. This is akin to rightwingers eating fentanyl to defeat COVID.
One of my co-workers went for that whole hog. I remember him telling me there was no need to brush any more - just swirl oil around your mouth for ten minutes. I don’t know if it works, but brushing only takes two minutes…
Well, there’s nothing wrong with using coconut oil for gum health. Some people even use it as a mouthwash because it was some antibacterial properties. It doesn’t replace the need for brushing your goddamn teeth, that’s an insane thing to think. But there is actually benefits to coconut oil for sensitive teeth (along with a change in diet), antibacterial properties, as well as the normal benefits of consuming coconut oil. It’s not all complete hogwash.
Organic food? Please let me take that out of your list. Organic produce has a huge lot of benefits over industrial, to both the consumer and the environment.
Yep. I’m pretty sure. But we have to distinguish “organic input based produce” v/s regenerative agriculture, which is also “organic”. And there’s a huge gray area in between.
I dunno what shysters you’ve all been going to. My chiro, with his kinesiology degree and full physiotherapy ticket in addition to his nationally-recognized certification, seems to do a lot more “do these stretches and stop sitting stupidly” guidance and reeeeally isn’t interested in a “programme of wellness” grift that my friends in other regions worry about.
Downvotes? What, jealous my guy isn’t an overt shyster quack like the horror stories? I hope when you need them, there’s a good one out there for ya. I’m 30 years on a wicked back injury and I’m still limber so woo!
It’s worth noting that gold plated connectors are not snake oil. Gold is a good conductor and doesn’t form a nonconductive oxide layer. That means it’s going to be more durable and won’t corrode together or apart like those old ass sheet metal tube sockets that all need to be cleaned.
meh. nutritional value is about the same, yeah, but that’s not the point of organic food. people who claim that eating an all organic diet makes you better are yahoos.
The point of organic farming is that it is just all-around better for the planet, the soil, the organisms therein and less polluting.
GMOs are an issue for nations’ food sovereignty, but organic food modt importantly means no phytosanitary products (such as the infamous roundup), which persist in the plants and cause all sorts of cancers
There is not conclusive evidence that organic food is better for the environment. Obviously there are facets of the environment impact that will be better than conventional agriculture, but there is a ~19% reduction in yield, and lower soil carbon in organic agriculture. A reduction in yield means more land must be cleared for agriculture, so the other facets of organic ag would need a to be substantially better than conventional to make up for it.
I disagree. Just following your source to its conclusion, I think it’s safe to say OA (organic agriculture) is better all around:
7.1 Pros • Lower emissions of CO 2 , N 2 O, and CH4 • Enhanced soil and water quality • Lower energy use per land area • Higher energy efficiency per land area 7.2 Cons • Lower soil profile SOC stocks [i.e. how much carbon is in the soil] • Lower crop yields • Higher land requirement • Lower energy production per land area
Your conclusion that we’d have to clear more land for agriculture use if we all switched to OA seems flawed; e.g. here in Germany we use about 60% of agricultural land to raise livestock feed like corn etc (landwirtschaft.de/…/was-waechst-auf-deutschlands-…). Seems to me like eating less meat and growing idk lentils or beans would not immediately lead to food insecurity.
This is also what the FAO says: yes, OA leads to yield reduction when compared to conventional methods, but not to food scarcity and instead to healthier ecosystems (www.fao.org/organicag/oa-faq/oa-faq6/en/).
Yeah, I definitely agree we’d be better off cutting land used for livestock. I guess it’s a slightly different story in Germany because any land you’re using for livestock (or livestock feed) is presumably land that could be used for human food. In America, much of the land used for cattle is ranch land not suitable for agriculture. We do still have massive amounts of land cultivating crops like corn and hay for cattle that is suitable for agriculture, though.
Just going down that pro and con list, though, it really does seem unclear to me. OA releases less CO2, but it also stores less CO2 in the soil. Lower energy use/higher efficiency per land area is great, but what we really want is lowest energy use per X amount of food. The “enhanced soil and water quality” part is also debatable. this study shows a higher eutrophication potential from OA, so worse for water. It does seem to be dependent on the crop, and the impacts of beef are so insanely higher than plants, that it almost seems irrelevant how you farm crops.
It’s somewhat like saying that a suburban block is better for the environment than a city block. It’s true, but only if you consider just that plot of land. A city block is way more efficient in terms of per person effect on the environment.
I think the crux of the problem is that the original tenets of organic agriculture were set by some scientists a hundred years ago, but also people like Rudolph steiner who was an occultist. There’s still a mix of actual science and hippy pseudoscience mixed in to this day. For example, the focus on only “natural” pesticides means using compounds that have higher runoff, persistence in the soil, and broader impacts to insect life. I wish that there was more flexibility for OA standards to change to the best evidence that we have.
Organic food is devinetively not snake oil. As you mentioned,Nutrition wise its exactly the same. However, the Environmental Impact is completely different. Organic farming is much better in terms of biodiversity, soil health. Since organic farming doesn’t include the use of pesticides it doesn’t kills everything else that would live on a field. Also, Theres always parts of the pesticides that stay in the crops and that you eat. I don’t know exactly how bad they are, but considering that(at least in Germany) Parkinson is an accepted work related illness for farmers its sure that they aren’t entirely safe for humans. However, we should take into consideration, that farmers get exposed to much higher doses of pesticides. If someone has some articles regarding this topic feel free to share.
This is going to be different country to country, but organic farming can still use pesticides. I posted a link below as well, but organic farming is also not conclusively better for the environment. It has lower yields, and therefore requires more land. You have to balance the effects of converting more land into organic farmland versus the benefit of, for example, less fertilizer runoff.
At the end of the day, “organic” is a marketing term, not a statement of health or ecological benefit. Most complaints about conventional agriculture (and GMOs) are actually complaints about industrialized agriculture as a whole.
I wish there was a good, regulated term for food that was produced with the best known processes (and perhaps there is for specific foods), but “organic” is not it.
I personally think, that the loss in efficiency is worth it, if you don’t have to use pesticides. This also becomes less relevant, when you take into consideration, that we have to move away from eating that much meat(which needs more land), so we have the land to compensate this loss in efficiency.
We have this shit at work, they make it incredibly hard to get a fucking attachment as a real attachment instead of a link to their cloud
Specially annoying since my organization is “geofence” but we work with people all over the world… So MS insists on switching attachments to links nobody can open outside my country
I speak from experience that no one other than professionals should be handling their own mail servers in 2024. I worked for a mail host. The amount of spam and attacks that befall a mail provider, even a small one, is bonkers. Plus, mail is just too damn important.
I wish it wasn’t the case because the idea of everyone privately hosting their own mail servers would be pretty awesome. Sadly the modern internet makes it way too risky.
I’m also not sure where they got their idea that cloud is cheaper from. On prem has always been cheaper, I’ve had to walk through fire and flames to get my company to approve cloud hosting as we simply do not have the capacity to be our own mail host. Goodluck explaining tech debt to upper management though, it’s like they’re allergic to the idea of understanding it.
God if that isn’t the truth. We changed from Thryv to rackspace and we went from zero spam to 30 a day and this is AFTER they block a bunch. Waste of my time every day having to go through them.
Oh maybe conflated a post from someone else like “self hosting email just sucks, everything goes to spam, give up” with a JWZ repost of something different
Tomato potato… My company uses MS because it’s the fucking industry default and it sucks
I would put more onus on them if we were talking about some niche thing they refused to give up. But MS is what everyone uses and they wouldn’t be able to ditch it altogether because MS has a monopoly
And how if you share a file in Teams and then six months later you want to share a file with the same name to ANYONE else via teams, well that’s a big no-can-do. Teams just went ahead and uploaded that file to your “stuff to share” folder in OneDrive and didn’t put it in a subfolder unique to the chat, or add a unique prefix or suffix or anything because hey, you’ll only ever share a file with a particular name once in your life, right?
And nobody would ever want to share a file with the same name, but different data, right? So Teams can just give the end user the choice between replacing the current file with the new one, or sharing the same one again to these new guys, because there’s no possible use case for actually having two files named the same with different information in the file, right?
Nobody would want to share a README.TXT, or Photo001.jpg, or contact.ics, or a zip file of a folder they just downloaded from Teams’ SharePoint interface, the file that’s automatically called “OneDrive.zip” without the option to change it before saving, more than once, right? Right??
Fuck teams. And fuck Teams(New) too, just for the shitty name.
You can even convert a shared link to an attachment by right clicking on it before sending (assuming you’re using Outlook web instead of the ancient garbage Outlook desktop app.)
I think this it not necessarily a bad thing. Worked in an office where they produce GB of CAD files. Sending it as attachment would fail for most clients because of their mailbox size, and receiving it also sucks because it would clog the local outlook inbox file, and everything would crawl to a halt when you open Outlook in the morning.
No, it only does it when it is too big. And that is very convenient rather than it trying to send your message and then giving you a failure notice. Why are you bitching about features that actively make your life easier?
There is a lot to bitch at M$ about, but this is not one of them.
Yeah, it sure does sound like it would be hard to have a notification if the attachment is going to fail due to size policies, and then have an option to use the link or cancel the attachment (and have you choose another way). It would also be unheard of for there to be a setting in that dialog to say to always do whatever action you take so it only inconveniences those who go with the default once.
User-hostile software is never a “you” problem. This applies to a number of FOSS products, as well.
If that were the case, it would confuse users. It would be flooded with tickets about the weird notification that they got and didn’t read and how they can’t attach files anymore.
“Cancel the link attachment”???
Fucking press backspace! Jesus Christ, did you just get your first computer ever? I’m getting the picture that critical thinking isn’t really your forte.
If you wish to talk about critical thinking, look at your own statements with respect to mine. Not once did I say cancel thenlink attachment, but this thing I didn’t say sure got you upset. Moreover, I wasn’t writing a formal specification. I’m sorry your assuming the worst and least likely meaning of what I thought was a pretty simple statement triggered you so badly.
The criteria where you would want to “cancel the attachment” here, is when a link would have been inserted in it’s stead.
I’m not upset. I am utterly bewildered at how a (presumably) functional adult in 2024 doesn’t understand basic email or how cloud drives work.
In looking back I realize that you’re one of those people who confuse emphasis with anger. I can’t really help you there. Out of curiosity, are you the type of person that reads a sentence with a period at the end as aggressive in a text message?
You say something like: “I think we should do x”
Person replies as: “Ok that should be fine.”
Do you read the response as aggressive (active or passive)?
I’m perfectly aware of how it works. My whole comment was a proposed way to manage it that doesn’t assume that everyone who uses outlook wants to use MS’s cloud service just because they also happen to use Outlook. I’m not sure how you missed that.
As for emphasis, “Press fucking backspace!” has a whole lot of it. I certainly would consider that, and not your hypothetical, as actively aggressive.
Nope, I just deal with OneDrive support constantly and I can say definitively that it’s pretty decent at what it does, and if the links you are getting or sending are not working, it is your fault.
If you want to bitch about something substantive, how about bitching about how 365 has like 20 admin panels that are opaque about what they are and what they do, terrible menu layouts in those menus, etc.
That stuff is a very real problem.
Some boomer who can’t figure out how cloud drives work is not a real issue.
The root issue is that you cannot understand how replacing an attachment that is too large with a link to that file that the recipient can then click, is a fairly elegant way to avoid issues for IT.
Proton is built on top of wine for windows compatibility. The wine project has been very careful to independent build its compatible versions of libraries. There should be no Microsoft code in wine.
Even then you can still have someone read the source and write a spec for a second programmer to write a library. The programmer never saw the source code but it was still useful. Still legal to do this. If someone dumped original source into the projector could be similarly checked for duplication without breaking the law.
Microsoft knows that if they start tampering with that they will get into all kind of shit antitrust wise. Proton is a pretty small project from their perspective, so it’s really not worth the risk and/or public backlash.
Sure, but Microsoft has since contributed a lot to Linux and other open source projects. That’s not me saying “oh they’ve changed!”, that’s me saying they’ve made it significantly harder on themselves to bring legal action against because they’ve publicly endorsed and supported the project for so long.
Whatever legal arguments they tried in the past that failed are even weaker now.
Considering that Microsoft has been involved in Linux development for a while now (they added some Linux stuff into Windows via WSL, for example), it would be stupid of them to try and kill it.
There are techniques to insulate the codebase. For example, you can have one person read the actual leaked code, explain the data structures and algorithms at a high level to a developer, then have the developer implement that logic themselves based only on what they understood from the explanation. I believe this is known as clean-room reverse engineering.
WebSub (formerly PubSubHubbub). Should have been a proper replacement for RSS with push support instead of polling. Too bad the docs were awful and adopting it as an end user was so difficult that it never caught on.
No I’m sorry, I pull my feeds manually using a barebones reader. I’m guessing your best bet is one of the web-based readers as it would require a client with a TCP port that’s reachable from the web. I have never seen a feed who provided the rssCloud feature though.
I wouldn’t say that it never caught on. I run a feed reader and ~6% of feeds have WebSub. Most of these are probably wordpress.com blogs which include it by default.
YouTube also sort of supports it, but they don’t really follow the standard so I don’t think it counts.
But the nice thing about WebSub is that it is sort of an invisible upgrade to the existing feed (or any other HTTP URI) so it just works when blogs enable it.
Most major feed reader services support it. One problem is that you need a stable URL to receive the notifications. So it is hard to make work with client-side readers. But I don’t think there is really a way around this other than holding a connection open to every feed you follow. So I would say that it does its job well. I don’t really see a need to get to 100% adoption or whatever. If you have a simple static-site blog that updates every month or so I don’t think it is a big deal that it doesn’t support WebSub.
Theres quite a few sites that still use it and existing ones in the Fediverse have it built in (which is really cool). But your right, the general public have no concept of having something download and queue up on a service rather than just going to the site. And the RSS clients are all over the place with quality…
Yeah it’s a very common misconception, I find it weird that people are still having it though when 0.19 is widely available.
Maybe they’re just saying it as a way to be dismissive of the issue, this kind of stuff happens often when people report or call to attention malicious instances or malicious users.
nor how letting a large, poorly moderated instance run wild can negatively affect discourse on the entire platform. Before Hexbear was defed’d on lemmy.ca, Lemmy was damn near unusable on many threads because of the spam and trolling. Blocking them doesn’t stop them from bothering those who haven’t and it affects the platform as a whole.
Blocking is not a real solution, it is putting a blanket over the problem and pretending it went away. People who suggest you do that are suggesting you enable bad faith actors by ignoring their behavior, as opposed to reporting it and/or making others aware so they can report it. We all need to work better to make the platform and spaces on it better, if no one works at it, nothing gets better.
My unpopular opinion: Federating with everyone by default is not sustainable.
It’s inevitable that the lemmyverse will shatter, and everyone will be better for it.
Instances will develop their own policies around moderation and behaviour, and federate with other instances with compatible policies.
Basically, federation only works if everyone is acting in good faith. It wouldn’t take much for a single entity acting in bad faith to fuck the entire fediverse presently.
Presently admits are blacklisting the bad faith instances. That’s going to change so admins whitelist compatible instances.
It only taking one asshole is why it doesn’t work. You just never going to have no assholes. So you need a justice system, and a way of policing the policing of it.
I would challenge you to think about how votes can influence the culture of a community.
You’re correct in that worrying about how many upvotes you can accumulate is very reddit.
I’m not really talking about karma accumulation, but rather the way votes can influence visibility of comments. When done methodically, this promotes some ideas over others, and presents an illusion that “everyone else thinks so”. This is a very, very powerful way to influence a community.
We are hard wired to absorb the opinions of those around us. Sure you can disagree with other group members, but even that is an acknowledgement that the alternative perspective you’re disagreeing with is a popular one.
You could absolutely influence people’s opinions on lemmy just with a hacked instance that manipulated votes on comments by just a few dozen points.
You make valid points. Apologies for the Reddit accusation.
But the one thing that comes to mind is that this kind of Communist, like in lemmy.ml, is not big enough to cause this sway.
Sure, the instance is massive, but most users don’t hold those same beliefs. Most people go to it as the “default” instance. So I really don’t think they have the numbers to cause this issue.
Sure. This thread is talking about lemmy.ml, but I’m talking about the current state of the lemmyverse.
I’ve posted this elsewhere in this thread but my unpopular opinion is that federation by default is not sustainable.
Presently admins federate with everyone and blacklist those which are problematic.
It’s inevitable that in the near future someone with a rudimentary understanding of hosting will be able to spin up a dozen instances, each with a few thousand bot accounts, intent on upvoting every “genocide Joe biden” comment.
The fediverse will shatter. Admins will realise they need policies to guide their own moderation, and acknowledge that they can only federate with specific instances with compatible moderation.
So instead of blacklisting bad instances, you need to change to whitelisting good ones.
Btw you are also free to block any instance yourself.
Not how the instance blocking feature works. it’s a common misconception because people don’t read the docs and just assume it does what they think it does. From the News Section on Join-Lemmy:
Users can now block instances. Similar to community blocks, it means that any posts from communities which are hosted on that instance are hidden. However the block doesn’t affect users from the blocked instance, their posts and comments can still be seen normally in other communities.
It’s not an alternative or replacement to defederation, not even close. I’m really surprised this misconception still persists even after widespread adoption of 0.19.x across the Lemmy network.
@bouh Lol look at you seething away, came here just to randomly attack people in a defederation thread.
I know what triggers these types of responses to defederation, many people believe that the Fediverse was some grand user choice and free speech haven. Which is an incorrect assumption, by a long shot. The fediverse since it’s beginning has never been a free speech platform, and also like all other top down servers prioritizes admins, the people who pay the bills and are liable for what happens on their server. So when servers violate these rules and all other options have been exhausted or it is clear that they will continue causing issues persistently, servers are defederated to maintain the peace and safety of their server. One thing to make clear is that all users have the choice of signing up to a different server that does federate, and if they are the victim of one of these compromised/bad-faith servers, they really should consider doing that.
Of course they didn’t, they’re just reactively replying to comments that trigger them hoping that the people they reply to also get triggered. They are a troll.
There were some timekeeping approaches, including candles marked with the hours based on burn rate (also used as alarm clocks by sticking metal things in them that would fall on a bell or metal dish below), but there also wasn’t a lot of reason to know the time accurately at night. Hell, in the time before clocks, there wasn’t much need to know the time accurately in the day. People used sunrise, noon, and sunset as the major markers.
Even up to the advent of trains, time was very localized. Timezones didn’t exist, and people would just come to a general consensus on what time it was, often via a clocktower or similar structure.
I remember reading once that if you time traveled back to Europe anywhere beyond 200 years, the majority of people would not know what year it was. All they understood was summer winter summer winter, someone born two years ago, someone died five years ago, that’s it.
The church kept track of Holy days but even that was an ongoing controversy with everyone.
You could go back to 1123 and there might be a hundred people that kept track of the year but even they wouldn’t agree with one another.
Faith and common belief … it’s the same system that basically works for many of the cultural ideas outside of actual science that we all use. Money, calendars, time, historic cultural units of measurements … all based on belief, habit and repetition.
We don’t know if it is actually 2024 … we just have 8 billion people (maybe 7,999,999,998 if you and I don’t agree) who all believe that it is 2024 that is all.
Huh… i man, I guess over time, timekeeping began to solidify. So when did we actually start keeping a common date? I know some religions or cultures think it’s way off of 2024. But when did a strong common use of calendars come About?
There were things like tracking guard shifts after sundown but the candle or an hourglass would be sufficient for that. It’s usually a case where you don’t actually care about what time it is now but you do care about time elapsed.
Honestly, even in the world after the invention of clocks knowing the time down to the minute isn’t very important for most people most of the time. Sure, it can be useful on occasion, but people put way too much emphasis on way too small of time units way too often.
Sure, but pretending you’re all going to meet at exactly 4:37 or whatever is just lie. Nobody is actually accurate down to the minute in their casual lives, and using units that are more precise than they are accurate is just lying about your accuracy. You can use modern clocks without pretending that single minutes matter. That’s why some people still talk about things like quarter hours even when using digital clocks. That’s a much more human kind of timescale.
Hey, if you live in a place where the public transport actually shows up when it’s supposed to that’s nice for you, I guess, but where I’m from pretending that the public transport is accurate down to the minute is also a lie.
Yep, quarter hours are how we normally function today. Which is fine and I wholly agree. You still need the second for that system to function though, as you can’t get that without measuring time.
I mean, the actual length of a second is pretty arbitrary. We could use a different basic unit of time and still be fine, but I get the point you’re making. I was never trying to argue that the invention of the clock was a bad thing, just that modern society has a problem with overly precise “measurement” of things that themselves aren’t actually as consistent as the measurements.
Lemmy could definitely use a bit more comment activity on a lot of posts.
I think it’s because nobody really wants to be the first to comment and offer an opinion that might end up going against the grain when a thread develops. There’s no ‘reading the room’ as it were.
I’m doing my part by commenting on threads. Like this one.
Reddit for sure is toxic. Generally, it’s much easier to be toxic in a large, anonymous group with an endless amount of subreddits to retreat to. Here, it’s maybe 10-20 people talking, so there’s not much room to hide, as it were. You keep running into the same faces, so it’s a bit more important to stay polite.
Exactly. This thread is a perfect example. There’s literally no real topic to discuss, and yet people are talking. And that’s a great thing to encourage if we want to grow this platform 👍
This has been one of the biggest things I’ve taken away from my time here too. Especially when I first joined and it was even more barren. I was probably the first comment on over half the posts I viewed for the first few months. Often nothing substantial but it would lead to insightful comments from users who may have never even opened it if they saw zero comments.
Well, comment anyway. You never know what’ll happen.
And even if you have a boring, vanilla opinion on that topic, post it anyway. Because it’ll lower the bar for others to comment as well. (As this entire thread demonstrates)
I mean, if anything it does serve as an icebreaker and gets the convo going. Or you can do like me and realize that you don’t actually know what the article is about or have the ability to understand it so you just try to make a joke and hope it lands and you can feel clever for a few minutes.
The other day I commented on a post that used an ‘internet pirate’ stock image. Mentioned how I’d seen a guy with an eyepatch on the street that day and how rare that was.
Someone ended up sharing a neat little story about getting poked in the eye with a sword and how a kid called him a pirate. That all added fuck-all to the topic at hand, but it sure was collectively entertaining.
I always tell people, hey, I’m not a bot here posting things, I’m trying to share things I feel you guys would enjoy. If nobody comments, it doesnt incentivize me to continue posting, it makes me feel like a crazy person talking to themselves. I encourage people to say something, even if it’s just “I really enjoyed this, thanks for sharing!” or something. I do that from time to time on others’ posts. If they’re showing me something new, of course I don’t know anything about it coming in, but I can let them know now I do know thanks to their contribution here.
All these posts pop up all the time, “dang, it’s so dead here” but if instead of making, liking, or commenting on that post, you could thank someone that did post, or share something that you think others might like. I was never a poster on Reddit. I’m no expert on what I post on. I just find stuff I think people would like, and now after doing it for the last few months, now I do know a lot more and can give people better insight than I could in the beginning.
Comments have been feeling low on my posts, and I think when is the point where me making 2 or 3 posts a day isn’t worth my time anymore, but then someone will say “oh this post really made my day” and so I come back the next day and post again.
This is why I comment so much, I want regular posters to feel they’re not shouting out into the void. Also, having conversation starter comments on most posts helps new people feel like Lemmy isn’t “dead”.
It’s true! I know I thanked all my readers on new year and the other holidays and all, because it takes both sides, the posters and the commenters, if we’re going to make this thing work. People focus on the posters, and that is the main draw, but the comments are what adds the life and color.
Oh hey, I love your owl posts. I always read the comments too because I know there will be more pictures and info. I’ve been meaning to comment there, but work got super busy and I forgot to stop by.
It’s not even just “the first” post. Lemmy is exactly like Reddit where any comments or posts, no matter how high quality, that can be interpreted as “against the grain” will be attacked. Lemmy has the same strong tendency towards group think that Reddit does, it’s just lower volume and the bias runs even farther left. Shrug.
Rationing downvotes could help break the groupthink while still providing a crowdsourced method of controlling spam and trolls. Other platforms have systems like this and it seems to work.
I think there have been some Lemmy instances that disable downvotes entirely also.
I still miss Slashdot’s moderation (and meta-moderation) system.
For those who don’t know, Slashdot comments are scored in a range of [-1, +5] and upvotes and downvotes have a reason attached (e.g. +1 insightful, +1 funny, -1 troll). Users are given a very limited pool of votes to hand out, which are allotted according to a secret formula based on karma and maybe meta-moderation. Meta-moderation is a volunteer task where you’re given an anonymized list of comments and mod votes, and asked whether you agree with reach of them or not.
Occasionally see something similar in real life, run a bar n grill. Just the other night had to tell that crew that I do have a menu, after the 6th order from the same table for dry ribs. Had the first guy ordered wings or a burger, same thing would have happened.
The last couple years on some other site really reduced the amount I commented. I’m not yet out of that initial instinct of just moving on without trying to engage, it just wasn’t worth it a lot of the time over there, had mostly positive experiences here though, experience wise.
I think it’s because nobody really wants to be the first to comment and offer an opinion that might end up going against the grain when a thread develops. There’s no ‘reading the room’ as it were.
Why offer an opinion when one can ask something about the post instead?
I’ve noticed that this effect is much more positive on my reception and well being.
The same comments on Reddit often feel like a coin toss, between positive reception and getting voted into oblivion and hated at. I welcome this change.
i was called into one office where they bought a backup external, like someone told them to previously. they took it out of the box, set it on the tower. and i guess, that was that. the magic box would now have backups of everything they did.
five years later, i got to tell them that there's nothing on it.
the pc was never configured to run a backup of any kind. hell, the drive was never connected to the pc.
so no backups of their documents, their spreadsheets, their mailing lists, their email, or their quickbooks (that part, they at least ran manual backups of, when prompted by the software, to a flash drive).
haha right! Most people don’t even understand that MacOS is a thing on it’s own, they just think it’s a Mac. They have never needed to make the distinction between software and hardware. If you were to suggest they “change to Linux”, they won’t have any frame of reference for what this means. Heck, most people still call Android phones “droids”, or if they know anything, “Pixels” and “Samsungs” without knowing that “Android” is it’s own thing. Macbooks have USB-C now but few users know that you can use an Apple charger to charge anything USB-C. It’s like back in the 90s you would frequently hear people not making the distinction between “monitor” and “computer”.
Don’t get me wrong, I think consumer education is the only plausible way out of this proprietary mess, but the further society moves away from PCs having discrete interchangeable components the harder concepts like “operating system” are going to be to understand for anyone not specifically seeking out that knowledge.
Absolutely right. And it blows my mind that at this point people are getting less technologically literate, not more. Job security for us IT guys, I guess.
It’s not all that bad. I’m sure there are as many youth keen to learn computers and they have easy access to all the tools they need to develop knowledge and skill
It’s just as we have become more knowledgeable, more capable, the difference between us and the normal people seems incredible.
But put us in an area needing different specialist knowledge and we’ll struggle like they do with computer technical stuff
We speak jargon. They don’t know the words, or if they do they use them wrong.
Also it sucks for us in IT work; when you are in an agile team and the manager two levels up doesn’t understand agile they do things like break up high performing teams (mine had been a team for four years - from the day the organisation decided to test agile) to share the people around so they can teach the others how to be high performing
Had they read anything about agile, they would know that longevity of a team is a good predictor for performances — but they wouldn’t read about agile, it’s an IT technical thing
I mean, two whole generations are growing up without using regular computers until they enter the workforce or go to college. When I was in highschool, I was told that the generations after me would mostly be more technologically literate than anyone was at the time, but with smartphones and ChromeOS it seems that the time to learn how to use a personal computer now begins far later than it was for us millennials.
There are so many basic things about using a computer that it is no longer to expect a high school graduate to know, such as how to use a printer (or what a printer even is), how to reboot a computer, what a browser is, etc.
Honestly these people shouldn’t use computers if they can’t be bothered to learn the bare minimum ngl.
You need a license to drive a car, and to get the license you have to pass a test to prove you know the basics of motor vehicle operation and the “rules of the road.”
I really don’t see why we couldn’t/shouldn’t apply the same logic to computer hardware.
In some contexts having people who don’t know what files are, what a folder is, and some other basics, do lead to people dying or lots of damage done.
Of course you’d expect people in these contexts to be trained but that’s not always the case.
Also having no idea what a file is and not knowing the bare minimum of how a computer works in this day and age is unacceptable. It should be taught properly in schools (instead of teaching some very specific stuff everyone will forget, like what a bus is, and then jump to what excel is and how to use it, like they did in my IT class back in high school)
Don’t get me wrong I’m very pro-tech literacy and education, especially with the tablet generation users that are becoming more abstracted from the system plumbing… but requiring licenses to use a computer?? Lol. If it’s that important to the job, employer should provide training just like any other piece of equipment.
I’m not going to expect doctors to know how to get into a bios or cleanup a corrupted file system, they specialized in human biology - keep them focused on that, and I’ll handle the OS management.
I don’t expect anyone to know how to install an OS either, that’s not the basics. But I do expect everyone to know what a file is, what file extensions are and what a directory/folder is.
Especially considering most computer users are operating at a higher level of abstraction (i.e. phones/tablets).
I don’t consider them computer users because they aren’t using a computer (yes I know they’re small computers but they operate in a different way).
If they want to use a personal computer, the thing with folders and stuff, they should learn how to use that, otherwise, if they don’t want to learn, they probably are better off not using a computer and use something else instead, like the aforementioned phone. If they absolutely need to use a computer, then they should (in absence of training or teaching at school) at the very least try and figure out how they can and should interact with this tool that costed you a couple hundred €s.
I never was the average user, even when I considered myself a dumbass who knows absolutely nothing about how to use a computer I was still considered a tech genius by people around me simply because I knew how to download something like a minecraft mod and navigate some folders to move said mod in the correct folder or simply install programs, while most other people around me couldn’t even tell the difference between the browsers and the file explorer.
I’ve encountered millenials who struggle with the simple concept that you can copy a file and paste it in a different directory. Zoomers my age who don’t know what a file manager is. And more.
Not everyone, not even close to being a majority in fact, is an 80 year old that is completely incapable of learning basic concept. People must know the very basics of how to use their most important and omnipresent tool, such as what is a file explorer, what do we mean by file extensions, what is a file, directories, how to organize them, copy files elsewhere, why do we sometimes need to use admin privileges (and why it’s dangerous), etc.
Saying it’s unacceptable that someone uses a tool without having interest in knowing the way it works outside of their limited usage fucking is elitism though!
I sure hope you know how to change the transmission in your car or have the tools to replace the bottom bracket on your bike or that you know how to replace an intake valve on your washing machine because it’s unacceptable for your to own these things and used them if you don’t! Heck, you must live somewhere, do you know how to build a house and maintain everything that can go wrong with one?
I’m not saying people should understand the inner workings. I’m saying they should understand how to use it or at least want to learn. I’m talking copy-pasting files, navigating folders, reading instructions, that sort of stuff. Read my comments before assuming my argument.
In your analogy it would be knowing how to use the steering wheel and the brakes and the basic rules of how to drive, and I sure as shit hope you know how to use them before you’re allowed into the streets in your car.
It’s like giving a book to a person who doesn’t know how to read and refuses to learn how to read. They don’t want to read, then they probably shouldn’t have a book. They need the book for whatever reason? Then they must be taught how to read.
But they know how to use it in accordance with their needs, you’re just mad that they don’t use it to do the shit that you feel is adequate, that’s elitist as fuck.
But they know how to use it in accordance with their needs
Until they have to ask me or tech support how to run something as administrator when they need to do something different for whatever reason. I worked with people in a lab, we do research on a lot of environmental and biological stuff, we sometimes use some quite advanced software, yet some of these people struggle with the most basic operations and they give up as soon as something isn’t working, with the logic “I can’t understand this so why bother”. I’m talking even the installation (on windows) of new programs. And these people have to use WSL to run terminal commands for software made specifically for Linux, you’d expect them to at least understand a bit of the basics, but nope, it’s seen as normal and/or a funny quirk to be illiterate instead of being trained on how to use a computer, at the end of my time there I managed to convert one to the Linux camp (the others want to switch when they get new computers) and he’s well on his way to become the guy who will have to help someone run a program as admin or some other silly shit, and I hope eventually more of them will become literate, but it shouldn’t have needed me or someone else being there for these people to comprehend computer basics, they should’ve been trained at the job or taught that in school.
There is no reason to not teach these people the very basics. Everyone will need to know what a file is and how to navigate folders at some point, or admin privileges, or some very basic troubleshooting, they should learn that even if maybe they’re only gonna use it twice. It is certainly more useful than knowing what drivers, buses, etc are (yes, this is what they taught us in basic IT class to people not doing IT). Otherwise, if they don’t want to learn that then a computer is likely not the tool for them.
If we want everyone to be able to use Linux or computers in general, we need everyone to learn how to use their tool. Without this you’ll get a billion phone calls for any small problems by people who don’t understand something basic, don’t want to learn or look up how to solve a problem they think is impossibly hard, and eventually these people will get angry and leave in frustration. Linux is very much an operating system that can work for everyone, even a dumbass like myself or my old grandpas and grandmas, but if we want people who use windows/mac to switch to it we first need to teach them the basics. It is then of my opinion that the people who can’t grasp the basics of how to interact with their computer and refuse to learn (this part is important) should use something else instead altogether.
I never talked about people switching to Linux as I couldn’t care less about that (the closest of am from running Linux is owning an rpi for pihole, all 5 other computers in my house are on W11 and my interest to switch is zero because I’m computer literate enough that I know I don’t want to make my life complicated just to be a contrarian) or people that use computers for work.
If you’re angry that you have to offer support to people when you work in IT you should change field. You’re like a mechanic that’s angry they get clients to do something basic like changing wipers, either teach the person or do it for them, that’s what you’re paid for, if everyone knew how to do all the stuff you’re helping them with you would be out of a job.
I don’t work in IT, I have even said I studied in a field that has nothing to do with IT. I simply happen to know how to do basic stuff and therefore illiterate people think I’m some sort of tech genius (I am not).
IT people also won’t be out of a job if people knew how to right click something.
Well I’ve got bad news for you, training and helping people is part of my job, I teach them and help them do their daily tasks and the same people ask me the same questions over and over again.
You say “they need to know even if they’ll use it once or twice”? Well they will have forgotten when that happens because they don’t use it often enough to remember and computers aren’t something they’re interested in in the first place. The computer is their gateway to the internet, just like a car is someone’s way to get to work, the intricacies of how it works and how to do things that are unrelated to these tasks can be taught to them, they will not absorb the information.
that’s a them problem. Doesn’t mean we shouldn’t teach people these skills. And I reiterate that these people should probably use something else that works better for them, not a computer then.
BSA ITA French/Swiss PF30 octa/isis I do them all.
I switched gearbox and driveshaft on a heavy van stuck on 20' incline 5m away from a wall. Early 70s Dodge. Scary getting under there.
I use runit and/or s6 as init and service supevisor, no logind, no dbus, just a window manager. I have one disguised as MSwin, my friend hasn't noticed in 7y it is not MSw. She says it is as good now as it was the day I installed it.
Ok and you pinky swear that you never use anything that you don’t know how it works and couldn’t care less?
And you expect everyone to act the same way or you can accept that people have other things to do? I wouldn’t blame a carpenter for not caring to know how their computer works if all the do is go on the internet, I would still want them to build my house before an IT that has an interest in home renovations!
I was thinking more “navigate to a file” type stuff. Understanding what admin privileges are, copying and pasting, stuff like this.
Often times when I needed to help a non-tech savvy person solve an issue on any OS it is some really dumb problem like them not knowing how to run some program as admin (no idea why they want to run a graph software that needs admin privileges to this day), opening the file manager, navigating to a folder to paste a file to it, or simply reading the popup instead of panicking.
At no point have I said going into a BIOS is basic knowledge. But if the people you’re dealing with struggle with the most basic shit ever then you’re not even gonna get to the BIOS part, and if they aren’t willing to learn how to use a computer then they probably shouldn’t use a computer.
I’m fortnightly* helping some friends upgrade from win7 to more modern windows. They’re smart people, one’s an accountant, the other a school librarian. But since neither of their professions nor their hobbies are computer technical they need help
They’re currently at the step “ring Microsoft to troubleshoot the licence”
Commerce and wealth-based taxes (income, sales, capital gains, etc) are sufficient to cover any and all social needs. Taxing people on their own possessions - especially those critical to living - is beyond unethical, it is evil.
A property tax on a primary dwelling residence is unethical because it is not attached to any act of commerce. It is your home. It is your family's life and legacy. Property taxes do not care whether the owners are billionaires or do not have a penny to their name, so they harm the middle class and the poor while it's little more than an afterthought for the wealthy. Case in point: Hawaiians who are forced to sell their ancestral homes because they cannot afford property tax... because the "value" of their ancestral land is constantly and steadily increased by wealthy interlopers. This is just plain, old-fashioned banditry and theft - nothing more and nothing less... and if you advocate for it or justify it, you advocate for evil.
I owe much of my career to trying to set up Linux From Scratch two decades ago. While it’s a much better experience installing Linux nowadays, there’s a lot to be said for the experience spending your weekend debugging a system will give you.
Been there with those old printer cables that had the two thumb screws. I spent way too long troubleshooting print problems turned out with some cables if you dont screw the thumb screws all the way in you don’t get a good cable connection.
Had a similar experience with Mint (of all distros) on an old laptop where it would not detect the headphones I plugged in. Spent like 30 minutes troubleshooting the settings/configuration and googling. Turns out the cable was weird and I just needed to not push it in too deep for it to be detected.
Once helped a nice old lady troubleshooter her computer. Everything was yellow. Checked monitor settings three times. Checked Windows for f.lux. Checked Windows video settings. Reverted drivers. Updated drivers.
iirc sudo has a bunch of quotes to spit out when an incorrect password is typed. Gentoo exposes that feature with the offensive USE flag.
Argh, why tho?
Like, I get that it is sometimes fun to throw some humor and things like that, but it is just too much trouble. It looks unprofessional and makes translation more of a pain than it needs to be. And that isn’t even opening the can of worms that insults actually are
IIRC It was added because too many people had been hacking together such a feature in their configurations, more often than not compromising their security. They added the option to reduce the amount of damage such a stupid much-asked-for feature deals.
P.S.: Honestly, I have used the feature before. While it’s usually funny, it can be brutal from time to time.
Often times, projects like this aren’t necessarily going for “professional” - its something the developer has made for themselves and is just being nice to share it and the source to the world.
Also, sometimes that sort of thing is directly related to making sure translations do actually work. While I doubt that was the case here, I remember seeing RedHat Linux for a while had a specific language option that changed the phrasing quite a bit (I believe it was in relation to how one of the devs on the team commonly spoke) and it was done to make sure that translations were working.
I don’t know about this specific program, but pretty much every other time I’ve seen something like this it’s been treated as another language and is a way for developers to test that that feature actually works.
Honestly, a colour picker is the last piece of software you should be translating names for. Even everyday colour names don’t have a direct translation. The line between “blue” and “green” is very slightly different than the line between “bleu” and “vert”, and the same goes for any other two languages. If you’re serious about your colour picker accuracy and you want to localize to another language, it would actually be more correct to have a completely different set of colour values, rather than trying to translate them. (Though “Liquid Nyquil” may be perceived the same across languages. I haven’t seen any studies on that one)
So let me get this straight, you want other people to work on a project that you yourself think is a hassle to maintain for free while also expecting the same level of professionalism of a 9to5 job?
I don’t have an answer to your exact question but I want to emphasize…
NOTHING in the history of humankind has ever existed like computer data. A 100% identical copy of videos, pictures, and music can be made almost instantly at what is essentially zero cost to the original holder of the data. Any comparison to “stealing” or to a physical object (a car lol) just falls flat because the situation is just so different.
Practically speaking, the world we live in, with computers everywhere, cheap storage, and easy fast internet access for so much of the world, has only been around for about two decades, maybe three. NOTHING like this has ever existed before, and businesses, culture, and laws have been very slow to catch up.
I’m not saying pirating is right or wrong, just that the whole idea is still so new that society hasn’t caught up to it yet.
NOTHING in the history of humankind has ever existed like computer data. A 100% identical copy of videos, pictures, and music can be made almost instantly at what is essentially zero cost to the original holder of the data. Any comparison to “stealing” or to a physical object (a car lol) just falls flat because the situation is just so different.
In Babylon Alexandria, docking ships were required to surrender any and all written materials to the library. There, scribes would make a copy of everything that was submitted.
The originals of the documents were stored in the library and the copies were given back to the ships.
NOTHING in the history of humankind has ever existed like computer data. A 100% identical copy of videos, pictures, and music can be made almost instantly at what is essentially zero cost to the original holder of the data. Any comparison to “stealing” or to a physical object (a car lol) just falls flat because the situation is just so different.
old uk piracy ads used the line “Piracy is theft!”
the funny thing is that it wasn’t actually legally theft
theft required (and still does i think) depriving the rightful owner of the goods themselves
thats a super copey way to say you pirate and dont see it as wrong. digital or not its still a product so the rules are the same.
of course the rule being pirate from big companies and try to not pirate indie stuff (unless ur a poor college student)
i pirate all my games and movies generally but i would pay if i liked a game a lot. but piracy is bad for the sole reason of if everyone pirated hypothetically then digital content would likely cease to exist which would also be bad. or maybe not if ur amish
Digital content wouldn’t cease to exist, it just wouldn’t be able to be monetised.
The content would once again be made by the people who are passionate about those projects, and not about the greedy shareholders that want mediocre content just enough to get people to pay for it and line their own pockets.
kbin.life
Top