Ajedi32

17 ms·

121.
by Ajedi32 4mo ago
Root directory would be on that blacklist for sure. Those "vague suggestions" actually seem to include some pretty specific examples. > A user’s entire "home" directory. Individual files and directories inside the hom
122.
by Ajedi32 4mo ago
> X% of any income Any income from what? The code is free, right? X% of your company's total revenue? Might as well just say "companies can't use this". Personally I like the idea of a "free as in freedom but not
123.
by Ajedi32 4mo ago
Congress passes plenty of laws. 95 so far just since the last election: https://www.congress.gov/public-laws/119th-congress Last congress passed 274. It's really only the controversial stuff that gets gridlocked.
124.
by Ajedi32 4mo ago
Ah yes I forgot, they're not "laws" just "rules" that the government will come after you if you break. Silly me.
125.
by Ajedi32 4mo ago
> [Laws] are decided by (hopefully apolitical, public-good-oriented) specialists in the field of interest This doesn't sound to me at all like how a democratic country is supposed to function. It feels like you're describing Ch
126.
by Ajedi32 4mo ago
What I find most concerning is that this isn't a bill or law. Unelected government officials at the FCC can apparently just decide to do this .
127.
by Ajedi32 4mo ago
I'm slowly coming around to the idea that closed source software was the original sin of the modern digital surveillance state. Due to the fact that it can't easily be modified without the source, software is uniquely able to act
128.
by Ajedi32 4mo ago
There are so many laws on the books that reviewing all of them every year is completely impossible. Doing what you propose would require the government to be greatly shrunk and simplified (which, to be fair, I'm not necessarily against
129.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Yes the social aspect does definitely still exist, it's just half buried by all the other nonsense.
130.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Interesting, I thought Revanced was just for YouTube, I didn't realize it worked with other social media sites too.
131.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Yes, when you're selling a product you can price the risk of lawsuits into whatever you're charging customers. You can't do that with free software without making it no longer free. "No problem: just don't get sued&
132.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Software can be copied infinitely, so even $1 of liability is effectively infinite since an unlimited number of people can potentially use it and sue you when it blows up. Nobody's going to be distributing software on the internet for
133.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
I literally just said it's not imminent. I'm focusing my attention on it in this thread because that's what this thread is about. Not like I walk the streets proclaiming our doom on my days off. :P Also, as I just said, there
134.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Well, like I said, if the trend is caused by something that's not easily reversible, and there's no negative feedback loop which would naturally cause birth rates to come back up in the future, then unless something happens to rev
135.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
The problem is that's not a likely hypothesis. There's no evidence lack of capacity is the cause of declining birth rates. In fact there's strong evidence for the opposite: countries with more resources to go around tend to h
136.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Correct, but my point is unless we find a way to intentionally fix the problem we're going to unintentionally walk into a disaster. I don't fault your logic, but I don't want to accept that disaster is inevitable.
137.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Because all plausible theorized causes (birth control, global reduction in poverty enabled by technology, women's rights) are not temporary conditions. (Or at least we better hope they aren't.)
138.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Lack of personal space is certainly not the cause of our declining birth rates. People in wealthy countries with lots of personal space actually tend to have lower birth rates than poorer countries with less. https://data.world
139.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
All plausible theories I've heard for the cause of humanity's unprecedented, historically low birth rates are things that could not occur in less intelligent species. (Birth control, women's rights, hedonism enabled by modern
140.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
> They tend to overgrow their environment, outstrip resources, and then collapse. That's not what's happening here. Birth rates are below 2.1 in many countries who are no where close to "outstripping their resources".
141.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
The population is not "reaching equilibrium", it's shrinking. If it was reaching equilibrium you'd expect the births per women to be slowly reducing until it approaches 2.1 and then staying there. It's dropping sub
142.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
If the "cogs of the machine" freeze up and economy tanks the top 1% will be fine. You might not be.
143.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
If the trend doesn't reverse, it's mathematically guaranteed. But realistically, I agree. Civilizational collapse would happen long before extinction, which seems like it would almost certainly return the birth rate back to pre-in
144.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Well, in the extreme case, human extinction seems like a pretty bad thing.
145.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Like this? https://xkcd.com/505/
146.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Are there other cryptocurrencies that use quantum safe cryptography that aren't being affected by the downswing?
147.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Correct. The whole point of this proposal (and other related ones like FloC/the topics API) is to get rid of the former while preserving the effectiveness of the latter.
148.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
The ability to "type words" is worse than all of that. Just type Win+R, "cmd", Enter and you've got arbitrary code execution on the connected PC. I think that was GP's point. Any competent security team would b
149.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Maybe? Depends on what the ads are for. Obviously I'm not going to buy something I don't actually want just to support the site I'm on, but I have no particular objection to buying something I discovered through an ad if it&#
150.
by Ajedi32 5mo ago
Because as GP alluded to, the thing it's replacing (cookies) already does exactly the same thing but isn't anonymized.

More ›