emptysongglass

9 ms·

61.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
You need to learn how to explain your ideas to other humans in more accessible language, because this isn't it. Your website tells me nothing and neither does your explanation.
62.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
But you don't have good cooling, good battery life, good standby, good speakers, or open firmware and don't appear to be interested in fixing any of these issues.
63.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Bad example as Libera doesn't use most of the IRCv3 spec and they don't seem to be in any rush to become compliant. Shame because truly IRCv3 compliant networks do really feel modern, with QOL features like persistent sessions. h
64.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
It is not disinformation. The Commission is unelected by the people. I specifically called out that the Commission does not serve the interests of the governed. That is a correct statement. What's more the Commission is more than one p
65.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
And from a Dane here, it's far from isolated to one Danish freak: the majority of parties support Chat Control.
66.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
And it's a slippery slope. The UK already damned itself with the Investigatory Powers Act of 2016 that allowed for Technical Capability Notices to be served in secret to any organization they desired to backdoor.
67.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Sometimes I think the HN contingent just willfully buries its head in the sand on issues of the EU, because they prefer to think of the EU as some idealist version of whatever they've lost as leftists in the US. What this person is wri
68.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
It's not clickbait. Many member states do support this. Much of the disagreement is on just how rights-violating the scanning should be. The situation here in Denmark is dire: nobody in the Danish media reports on it, so everybody ju
69.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Why would you have respect for Berners-Lee? He sold out his own creation to corporate interests by supporting DRM.
70.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Yet you keep name-calling, so who is acting rudely? 3 different applications to access your secrets is what you focused on and now you're moving the goalposts. KeePass having 3 different client applications is what you chose to make a
71.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Please don't make personal attacks on HN. The only difference between an imagined smooth solution is the sync mechanism and a unified client application ecosystem, neither of which is really possible without a large company behind it.
72.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
KeePass is a community project, Bitwarden is not. These are just client applications that sync and interact with the .kbdx file the community has formalized a standard on. That's why Bitwarden has a unified client application ecosystem
73.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
> If you are 25 you should be seriously thinking in the next 2 years, and by 30 have them I need to push back on this because no one is actually an adult at the age of 25 despite those people wishing it were so. You do not have your shi
74.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Nothing about this invalidates any of our assumptions because time does, in fact, exist for us humans. This sort of science is frustrating for me because we all know exactly what we mean when we reason about time together. Science saying, &
75.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Is it just me or does the website render poorly on mobile?
76.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Why is a programming language only available on macOS?
77.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
As many, many in your issue tracker have commented, you should not be building on Fedora as a base.
78.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Your government recently mandated technical capabilities for breaking encryption. Australians let that fly. There is nothing special about Australians, just as there is also nothing special about the British people who also did nothing when
79.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Tried that with MEPs for my country of Denmark: no reply.
80.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Yes, it's easy to view Lucas' films with a rose-tinted lens, but try and watch them now and you see: poor acting, poor writing, one-dimensional characters and plot points.
81.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Buddhism as an organized religion is opposed to warfare. That is the mainstream and majority view and practice. It derives its legitimacy from the Buddhist suttas. The First Precept — "I undertake the precept to refrain from taking lif
82.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Mahayana and Vajrayana are both branches of Buddhism that venerate texts most scholars of repute hold in very dubious regard. They came long after, and are stylistically distinct from, the Pali Canon. > A. K. Warder notes that the Mahāyā
83.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
> And denying that Buddhist violence (that too backed by mainstream Buddhist ideologues in the largest Buddhist practicing countries in the world) is ridiculous. You appear hellbent on conflating humans doing bad things on behalf of reli
84.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Again, this is incorrect. I have cited direct sources of Buddhist scripture that unequivocally denounce and condemn violence in all forms. Encourages is far too weak a word to describe Buddhist scripture on the topic, which uses strong la
85.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
If I were a human who came from a warrior culture that revered battle as the One True Way to find liberation, I would fully expect that human to be more violent than one who has dedicated their life to a non-violent religion. Do you really
86.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
It is not an interpretation, it is a translation. I could just as well quote the Pali directly, which offers no such justification for the inherent violence you appear to claim (emphasis my own): > Sabbe tasanti daṇaḍassa sabbe bhāyanti
87.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
It's not an interpretation. It is the foundational suttas of all of Buddhism themselves, which I have linked to. The Pali from which they are translated contain the same explicit prohibition against violence. Quoting Buddhist theologia
88.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
This is simply not true. Most regional traditions of Buddhism do not allow for the use of violence with justification and, regardless, the Buddhist suttas do not provide any such justification.
89.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
Because Buddhism is explicitly anti-violence. It does not emerge from a vacuum. The Buddha himself explicitly, insistently, and repeatedly stressed this. It's in the very scriptures all of Buddhism is built on. Buddhism is not an i
90.
by emptysongglass 1y ago
> The premise that Buddhism is anti-violence feels like a misunderstanding on itself. Buddhism is anti-violence. I can't believe I need to make this argument here. Folks, if you're going to make statements, please do your res

More ›