AnyOldName3 @ AnyOldName3 @lemmy.world

Posts

1

Comments

366

Joined

2 yr. ago

Purdy Purdy Prisoner is both gay and a rapist, and the two aspects aren't presented as orthogonal.

Look at the wheels to check for bogies. A train or tram without bogies will come to a stop. One with bogies will multi-track drift until the tracks get too far apart.

The plan at the time was what the film explicitly said. They were devastatingly effective at taking the Tantive IV. They were devastatingly effective at destroying the sandcrawler (to the point that they couldn't disguise it as having been attacked by sand people). They were devastatingly effective at nearly hitting the protagonists enough times that they believed they were being shot at for real, when actually they were just being herded onto a ship with a tracker on it so they'd reveal the location of the rebel base they'd spend the first half the film failing to threaten or torture out of Leia. They were devastatingly effective at destroying the rebel's attack force against the Death Star, and were seconds away from destroying Yavin IV and the rebel base on it when someone used supposedly-extinct space magic to make what the film had previously described as an impossible shot against a tiny target.

The only time they miss is when the film says they did so on purpose.

In A New Hope, the only time stormtroopers miss is when they do so intentionally, when they're chasing the protagonists off the Death Star, and onto the Millenium Falcon, which has been fitted with a tracking device which they know will be taken straight to the rebel base. They easily overwhelm the guards on the Tantive IV at the beginning of the film even when only a few of them have made it through the breached airlock. The myth that stormtroopers miss comes from people not noticing the scene where Tarkin discusses intentionally letting the rebels escape so they can follow the tracking device back to their base.

WSL2 is, but WSL1 implemented the Linux kernel API in NT, so ran things directly.

You dun goofed here. You don't need to agree to the GPL to use GPL software, so the Next button shouldn't be greyed out when the checkbox is unchecked. You also only need to show the user the GPL when you give them a copy of the software, so there's no need to show it during the installation process.

I never said I preferred Outlook to Thunderbird, but both are generally horrible.

It affects Windows 10, too.

The mail server for the accounts I've noticed it struggling with is GMail, and it manages to push mail to other clients on my non-Windows devices just fine.

Having the tinkerer options should come after making the software work. From my perspective, Thunderbird is a passable clone of a bad mail client. None of its tweakable options turn it into a good mail client, and so it would be a better mail client than it is had the effort spent on implementing the tweakable options instead been invested into making it generally better.

Desktop mail clients all seem to be dire, but Mail for Windows 10 seemed to suck a lot less than anything else. I, too, am a victim of it not noticing new mail for a couple of hours after it's sent unless I explicitly refresh it, despite it being set to get new mail on push, but I'd still rather use it over Thunderbird, which I tried years ago, and tried again when they started warning about forcing Outlook onto people. Unfortunately, it looks like Mozilla decided that there were a non-zero number of good things about Outlook, and made a clone of it, as it's got basically all the things I hate about Outlook.

It's not a good tool if one party is likely, but not guaranteed, to win without your vote, but is much worse than the other. You should only spoil your ballot if your constituency is has a large enough majority that your vote won't matter at all, or none of the parties are less bad than the others.

If you're voting on the single issue of Palestine in the US presidential elections (not the primaries), then no state has a large enough majority to justify as spoiled ballots, and one party wants to support a genocide while the other wants to discourage it (even if they're doing a crap job of it), so there is a least bad option to vote for.

Part of it depends on how you define things. They're not a monopoly in terms of having eliminated all their competitors, but they're a defacto monopoly in terms of being able to do the things a monopoly can. As an example, they can dictate pricing for the whole market as their margins are better than AMD's, so if AMD undercut them, they can retaliate by dropping their prices to the point AMD would have to sell at cost, so AMD can only sell things in the narrow price window where Nvidia doesn't feel threatened. On the other hand, AMD does exist and does sell things.

There's a good argument that Nvidia only had the money to do the work because of anticompetitive practices, and so shouldn't be allowed to benefit from it unless everyone's allowed to benefit from it, otherwise it's just cementing their dominant position further.

I've swiped to upvote on occasion, but I've accidentally triggered both it and replying while trying to scroll fast more often. I think it's really just a matter of being fat too keen to activate off motions that mostly go up or down, and until it's not in the way of scrolling, there's not any way to reliably judge how good it'd be if it wasn't.

If the AI had any actual I, it might point out that the most recent Halloween Document was from twenty years ago, and Microsoft's attitudes have changed in that time. After all, they make a lot of money from renting out Linux VMs through Azure, so it'd be silly for them to hate their revenue stream.

I'd be unsurprised if it's just set up to abandon the conversation if accused of lying, rather than defending its position.

There are two things in conflict that apply to Dolphin, and in general to post-DRM console emulators:

• It's illegal to create or distribute a device which circumvents DRM.
• It's legal to ignore DMCA restrictions for the sole purpose of making things interoperable, like running software on machines it wasn't originally created for when you'd be able to run it on the machine it was created for.

The wording in the legislation is sufficiently vague that it's not obvious whether it's illegal to create or distribute a device that circumvents DRM for the sole purpose of interoperability. If a case goes to court, it could set a precedent that has to be applied in the future, or it could be settled out of court to avoid setting a precedent, and so far, there's no case law setting a precedent.

When Nintendo asked Valve not to allow Dolphin onto Steam, despite what some people were saying, the decryption key was known to be there, and the Dolphin team had legal advice that it was reasonable to expect that the interoperability exceptions had more power than the DRM circumvention restriction. The decryption key is a so-called illegal number, but these are probably not actually illegal, and you can see several examples on the Wikipedia page about them. Nintendo ended up taking no action against Dolphin, and it wouldn't have been a good case to try and set a precedent with as there weren't obvious damages now it's been so long since the Wii stopped being sold, and because the Dolphin team have historically been so diligent about stamping out discussion of piracy in their official communities, making it hard to argue that it's intended as a DRM circumvention device rather than an interoperability tool. Also, Dolphin's never taken donations, easily covering all their costs with just basic ads on their site.

Yuzu's a bit of an easier target. For a start, it's got a Patreon, and that makes it easier to paint its developers in a bad light as they're getting money (as well as meaning there's actual money to recover). They've also got data to back up the suggestion that lots and lots of Yuzu users are pirating games instead of just playing games they've already got a disk copy of. In a sensible world where laws are applied fairly, there's an easy argument that hoops to jump through like requiring the user to provide Switch firmware show they're not trying to make piracy easy, but it's not like Yuzu will be able to muster up enough money for lawyers to match what Nintendo will be spending.

The worst thing that could come out of this is a decision that interoperability isn't an excuse for circumventing DRM under any circumstances, as that'll have serious consequences for a bunch of other projects, and Nintendo are likely to want to push for this precedent to be set rather than accepting an out-of-court settlement. On the other hand, Nintendo could mess up and get the opposite precedent set, although if it looks like that's going to happen, they're likely to drop the suit.

I'd imagine they're already censoring U+1F595 🖕, and that's already a thing.

Yeah, the Wayback Machine doesn't use Reddit's API, but on the other hand, I'm pretty sure they don't automatically archive literally everything that makes it onto Reddit - doing that would require the API to tell you about every new post, as just sorting /r/all by new and collecting every link misses stuff.

People insist it happens in the UK, too, and we don't have school shootings, so wouldn't have that source for the claim.