Ajedi32

4 ms·

1.
by Ajedi32 5d ago
They picked a good name for fighting that. The optics of trying to outlaw heresy probably aren't great. ;)
2.
by Ajedi32 6d ago
Is Google under any legal obligation to continue releasing software updates to their competitors in the first place? Maybe there are some contractual obligations in place (I remember back when Google first started making their own hardware,
3.
by Ajedi32 8d ago
Important details further down: https://grapheneos.social/@GrapheneOS/117282129725629495 So it seems like the problem isn't that the new API is Pixel exclusive, but that the first and third quarterly release patch
4.
by Ajedi32 8d ago
Yes, because glucose wetware can be held liable for malpractice if it gives you nonsensical advise.
5.
by Ajedi32 10d ago
And/or ramp up production in other countries not dependent on the strait. One way or the other the market will eventually react to stabilize prices, it just takes a while (years) for the infrastructure necessary to do that to be built.
6.
by Ajedi32 10d ago
Unlike wars, EV adoption is a slow, steady, relatively predictable process. I don't think it'll have a very noticeable impact on gas prices the way short term crisis tend to. The much more noticeable factor will be reducing how ma
7.
by Ajedi32 10d ago
That's the main issue, yes. But where was all that oil Iran was producing going before their infrastructure was destroyed? Are you claiming they only ever used it domestically and didn't export any of it? That seems unlikely.
8.
by Ajedi32 11d ago
"such firms" being any and all IT companies? They would still exist, just not in any country insane enough to pass a ridiculous law like this.
9.
by Ajedi32 11d ago
Yes, there are some people who thrive on risk and will do things like jump off a mountain in a wing suit just for the thrill of it. That doesn't mean making that sort of personal recklessness legally mandatory for employment is a good
10.
by Ajedi32 11d ago
What if you're not charging for the content, but as compensation for the network bandwidth / server resources consumed by serving that content? The idea isn't to profit from content (the IA is a nonprofit anyway), just to all
11.
by Ajedi32 12d ago
So lack of supply isn't the problem, it's the people who want a place to live who are the problem? Would you make this same argument if the increased demand was from people being born rather than immigration (because it is both)
12.
by Ajedi32 12d ago
> Or the local going rate for qualified personel were higher than you were willing to pay (which per def is true, if you had to bring in foreign work?). Yeah, by definition this is pretty much always true, no? No matter how scarce local
13.
by Ajedi32 15d ago
I think saying you "refuse to work for companies that do military work" because you "don't want to deal with moral grey zones" is a pretty binary choice with not a lot of nuance, but whatever. I think both our posit
14.
by Ajedi32 15d ago
Yes, in your reference frame. That's one of the basic tenants of relativity.
15.
by Ajedi32 15d ago
The "I" a person. If a company has no employees, it ceases to exist in any meaningful sense, so if you refuse to work for such companies you better hope somebody else will do so in your place. Just to be clear, the conversation so
16.
by Ajedi32 15d ago
This isn't about the nations taking actions off the table, it's about: > Serious question: should companies not participate in contracts from their country's defense department? I contend that unless you want your govern
17.
by Ajedi32 15d ago
> "someone else will do it if i don't".... (aka your argument) That's not the argument. It's more like "if I don't do it then I better hope somebody else will, otherwise my whole country will inevitably
18.
by Ajedi32 16d ago
I'm using Firefox, can't re-produce. How did you navigate away without first freeing your cursor? I just pressed escape like the browser message said to, but then obviously at that point the cursor was already free so I couldn&#x2
19.
by Ajedi32 16d ago
Because the doppler effect shifts all light coming from that direction to infrared, which your eyes can't see.
20.
by Ajedi32 17d ago
Depends on how much you trust the government's ability to restrain itself once the capability for mass surveillance is out there and widely deployed.
21.
by Ajedi32 18d ago
My understanding is that this is difficult due to DRMd content refusing to work with Free operating systems. Because yes, this nonsense would never fly in a world where Software Freedom enabled a competitive market for TV operating systems.
22.
by Ajedi32 18d ago
I'm confused. Are you saying Graphene doesn't implement secure boot? Or that you don't think requiring users to wipe their phone and install a custom OS build before exercising their freedom makes exercising that freedom hard
23.
by Ajedi32 22d ago
I said it's borderline not-free, not actually not-free so I don't know why you just wrote 7 paragraphs arguing against something I didn't say and have explicitly and repeatedly disclaimed. Yes, GrapheneOS is free, but it has
24.
by Ajedi32 22d ago
I'm not asking for anything, I'm telling you what they are doing, and what they are doing is going right up to (but not quite crossing) the line of blocking you from modifying the software on your phone. To re-iterate: > If t
25.
by Ajedi32 22d ago
For what it's worth this isn't just my "personal taste". I think Richard Stallman and the Free Software Foundation, at least, would agree with my definition[1]: > Freedom 1 includes the freedom to use your changed ver
26.
by Ajedi32 23d ago
Best thing is it's not just a new coat of paint; there seem to be some very significant usability improvements in here.
27.
by Ajedi32 23d ago
It's not flagged now. But yes, way too many people use flags as an "I disagree" button these days. I feel like that used to be very rare (even down-votes aren't supposed to be used that way) and is becoming more common,
28.
by Ajedi32 23d ago
> Well GrapheneOS would still be free software?!?!? It's the software from those companies that wouldn't be. I think I have a broader definition of software freedom than you do. In this hypothetical scenario, GrapheneOS itself
29.
by Ajedi32 24d ago
> Software freedom is about being able to use the software the way you want You can't use the software in the way you want if it uses hardware backed cryptography to block you from doing so. > you get access to the sources, you m
30.
by Ajedi32 24d ago
Thinking about possible ways they could retain the same security properties without impinging software freedom... maybe there's a way they could make the root of trust default to a signing key embedded in the device's own secure h

More ›