MasterBuilder @ MasterBuilder @lemmy.one

Posts

2

Comments

148

Joined

2 yr. ago

We both know it won't prevent them. They will just repackage their arguments to get the result they desire. For example, the supreme court appointments arguments.

Free speech does not include subversion of the constitutional right to vote or seditious speech. The judges are clearly partisans. I'll wager they are Republican appointees.

One where Republicans block all Democrat court appointments, then push through their candidates at high speed when Republicans are in control.

What I can't figure out is why the Democrats can't use similar tactics successfully. This is how we got a Republican Supreme Court.

Somehow they were able to stonewall Obama's nominees for over a year, then pushed through conservative appointees fast enough to give us whiplash - legal problems be damned.

Tubi has one. I think it is called The Final Days of Planet Earth, and is about an insect-like alien accidentally brought here from a moon landing.

This is my view. I went the privacy route. The result is the addictiveness of the service went way down. For me, that's a win.

There are other ways to give us content we might like. For example, have a list of topics and categories we can select. This reduces invasiveness while providing some benefit.

The problem is that does not give Google what it wants out of the relationship.

This is the way.

We've been able to survive for 200,000 years without any of this s***.

Preach!

I'm old enough to remember when none of this stuff existed. I have a threshold Beyond which I simply stop using the service.

I'm actually pretty close to my lifestyle from before 1995. I don't have any cable I have basic internet I don't do any of the Music Services. Video-wise I only have Prime and any free services I can get on Chromecast for TV. I'm getting close to my threshold with prime, as the annual fee is getting real high.

I'm already starting to lose interest in most YouTube channels. It's not so bad here, really. I get to experience reality more.

I agree that if it is already AAC, it should not be changed as it has the highest fidelity and best compression.

While AC-3 is not the best, it and AC-4 are the only formats i know that can encode TrueHD and Atmos metadata, so that should be kept it it is there.

Any transcode will lose fidelity unless the target codec is lossless, and I don't think AAC has a lossless mode.

Lower level languages are definitely helpful in learning how computers work. When I was in college, I was not taught C, but our algorithms course was in C. We were expected to learn it on our own.

lisp and Prolog were used for AI - those we learned in class. Assembly was the ultimate "get intimate with the machine" language, and we wrote a simple compiler for VMS.

All of this is meant to help us understand how to work with machines. It doesn't mean that that's how we should work with machines. Sometimes the higher level language is the better choice. Sometimes it is not. We are expected to make that decision based on the situation at hand.

Can you counter those for those of us who are spectators?

I suppose the question is whether Rust is worth the extra work. I know nothing of rust. I know C#, JavaScript, and some other web app tools. Is Rust significantly better than those? Are there enough developers interested in Rust to encouage robust participation?

Can Lemmy handle plugins in a language agnostic way? If so, that might be a better route. Again,I am not advocating anything, just raising questions that can lead to an informed decision.

I don't know the backstory to this. My view in General on open source projects is that the people who initiate those projects and manage those projects generally have final say. If enough people disagree a fork will naturally occur.

However I'm a little uncomfortable with the idea of claiming that they should not curate and control how their own project is managed. I'm here labor of love should not be forcefully taken from them. They have reasons for their decisions and it is their baby.

If you believe that a large number of users want the features that you want, then by all means Fork it. We will find out over time if you are right. And that is how it works. There should be no animosity.

Why is AC-3 bad? It's pretty much compatible with everything, holds Dolby Digital and atmos. Especially if the source is already encoded in AC-3, would it be wise to re-encode it?

Matrix has too much metadata, i read, and XMPP so far does everything Matrix claims to do. I am sticking with XMPP (Jabber) for as long as i can, especially because it has proven itself over 20 years.

I, too, started using it, and i'm impressed.

Yes. The FCC is part of the Executive branch, which is lead by the President, who appoints the leadership of the institutions that carry out the executive branch's assigned job: enforce and execute the law.

Nobody is advocating tolerance, at least I didn't see it. This is about ensuring free speech cannot be subverted silently.

Note I pointed out that the issue is the arbiter of "tolerable". Citizens need to make that decision with accurate information. In our case, that would be done through some department of the justice system combined with awareness and involvement by civil rights organizations.

Also, if you saw The Blues Brothers, you saw that Skokie Nazi march from the ACLU case, and the derision of them portrayed. Counter protests were equally allowed. This airs the issues in the light, where the unacceptable ideas can be countered.

The alternative is that those ideas spread quietly like a virus, unimpeded by facts that expose the flaws in those beliefs. Once people identify with the movement, it is very difficult to change their minds.

I've read an awful lot of comments yelling at EFF for supporting very bad people. I think you all do not understand the point being made.

It is not the isp's job to police the network. The proper route is to raise the complaint to the proper authorities and let them police the problem. Specifically, So they can do it in a transparent auditable and citizen visible fashion.

What happens when the ISP decides to block a person or organization because they think what they're doing is unacceptable, but they're wrong? How do we police that?

Nobody sees anything because they're blocked before anything can be shown. That is instant hidden censorship that nobody can stop because nobody knows about it.

Even the ACLU went to bat for a Nazi organization on a free speech topic because letting it pass would set a precident that would not be reversed, and thus eventually would be used to silence just causes.

Edit: if that's still too complex to parse, replace the target with the sermons of Dr Martin Luther King Jr.

By this logic, any untrained citizen who interrupts a robbery by shooting the robber in the head from behind should not only be absolved of the crime but should be lauded for it.