Zworf @ Zworf @beehaw.org

Posts

0

Comments

325

Joined

2 yr. ago

There's many EU commissioners pushing for commercial projects already, like Thierry Breton and his ever present "digital everything" initiatives that nobody asked for except the companies that are implementing it. Like eIDAS and the recent digital ID thing. The EU is very receptive to commercial interests but mostly ones originating from the EU.

It is true that we do have a very different outlook on privacy but that should not be mistaken for a lack of commercial interests.

As a general rule, when trillion-dollar companies don’t like regulation, it simply means they’re admitting the rules are good for their customers.

We're not their customers. That's the root cause of this problem.

I'm still surprised people in the US actually vote only for people so old they can't reasonably do the job properly. I mean what's up with that?

I guess the cynic in me thinks only people that old have a lifetime of being beholden to the powers behind the curtain to have their trust to receive big campaign funding. But that doesn't explain Trump. He was never really 'favoured' by the establishment as far as I gather. Not that I think he was a good president of course, don't get me wrong!

I don't really want to sign up to their T&C's, but I did in the past. But their web client is really annoying, it's constantly blocking me and kicking me out and giving captcha's. Probably I have too many ad/tracking blockers :P

But again, with a real FOSS ecosystem you wouldn't have to worry about such skullduggery because there is no tracking to block.

You choose to exclude yourself by placing such a high value on privacy. Privacy for what here?

It's not the privacy of the content we're discussing, it's the horrible Discord client that keeps datamining your PC. It even inspects all the processes.

https://www.reddit.com/r/discordapp/comments/43lqyb/why_is_discord_recording_our_open_programs_and/

And they don't allow third party clients. They say it can't be turned off because of their push to talk features but I never use those anyway (and they are not needed for FOSS projects, they're more gaming features).

Anyway I don't trust them and don't want to do "business" with them (and definitely not with Tencent). My point is that this mindset of "placing a high value on privacy" while admittedly quite niche, is definitely something many FOSS projects subscribe to. In particular Home Assistant which I mentioned, because a big reason for people using it is because they don't want all their home data in a big data cloud (e.g. homekit, alexa, google home etc). The whole point of home assistant is so you can use your smart home equiment without having to subcribe to commercial companies. And then they do something like this.

What they could do is provide a secondary channel or a bridge to discord which they don't bother with.

YESSS. I so wish this would be considered more.

There's several FOSS projects that I engage with that use discord pretty much exclusively and as such I'm locked out of the community. Like Home Assistant.

I really don't understand why they use it for FOSS projects that are all focused on privacy (home assistant for example focuses on using home automation without cloud so your data doesn't end up everywhere). And then lock you in to such a privacy-hostile service to communicate with them, when actually great alternatives are available like Matrix/Element.

And it's one of the richest countries on earth. Yet can't even afford a lunch break or overtime? Give me a break...

Not to mention that not providing breaks or even weekends is not even helping productivity. Workers will be tired working less hard and making more mistakes.

Many regions won't need that of course :)

It’s about the level of support most civilian populations tend to show towards an invading force that’s actively bombing them. How many civlians during the German Blitz do you think would have supported trading Dover to the Nazi’s in exchange for a temporary ceasefire? How about for a second time after the first ceasefire was broken by another ground invasion?

That 2-4% would not be support for Russia, but for a negotiated treaty that involves giving up some territory (how much to be determined of course). It can't be stated that those 2-4% would just want Russia to win because if that is the case no referendum is needed because the constitution would no longer apply.

And I was thinking of an actual resolution to the conflict with UN support and backed by an international coalition (after all, if Russia is at the negotiating table a security council resolution becomes a possibility too!). Not just a temporary ceasefire.

A lot of Ukrainians lived in the occupied regions before been being forced from their homes. Plenty more currently live in the areas that Russia has officially declared as part of its territory but which are currently held by Ukraine. Far from some lines on a map, a very large part of the population have at least one family member who didn’t flee faster than the Russians during the initial attack and who either have been living in fear, had their children taken, or were shot in the street. In both of the first two situations, people tend to be very dedicated to the idea of getting their family currently being held by the Russians back.

I know it's terrible, but would you risk your remaining children serving in the army just for some payback? I wouldn't. It will only lead to more death and it won't bring those murdered back. I would just want it to be over and for court proceedings and inquiries to start. And for all the abducted children it's also better for all of this to end sooner rather than later so they can be brought back before they're brainwashed.

Don't forget WWII was one of very few that ended in a very decisive victory. Many other wars end up in a stalemate. Like the Korean war. Even the mighty US could not hold on to Afghanistan and things are now as bad as they were before the war. Despite being a massively overpowered force (it was clearly an asymmetric war).

I see this kinda going the same way into a gruelling meatgrinder. I don't see many human conflicts resolved with one side being the 100% winner. And there is no guarantee that Ukraine will win if it continues. Especially when it comes to meatgrinding wars, Russia has the population and strict regime to keep throwing people into it. It's basically their MO, it's how they beat the Germans as well. Ukraine loses less but there are much fewer people to replace them with and also less motivated than at the start (the people really willing to fight already are).

And don't forget, Russia still has nukes and Ukraine doesn't. That will always hang over this conflict like a dark cloud. I wouldn't put it past Putin to use them even if he lost just out of spite. Not saying we should give in to Putin just because of that but we shouldn't put him in a situation where he has nothing left to lose.

I'm sure many people are more patriottic than me (especially in the US people seem to be very patriottic). Just 2-4% sounds low, that's all. But anyway, if that is their wish, ok, fair enough. I do hope they will be victorious. I just don't think the human price will be worth it, and talks should at least start.

None of this is likely to convince people to give the people who did it land it has never held on the promise that in a few years the exact same thing will happen again.

By the way this is of course all part of the negotiation. Right now there is no talk whatsoever, and Ukraine is in a very good position, I could imagine this ending up with Russia walking away with only to the land they control (which is all pretty devastated). Ukraine is starting to withdraw from places now and they might not have such a good negotiating position later. Especially if Trump wins, don't forget! Nothing can be taken for granted then. NATO could even fall apart as he has suggested.

The territory thing is important because the Ukrainian constitution specifically requires that any change in the nations borders be approved by a public referendum in which all citizens can vote. Given that current polling shows about 2 to 4 percent support for such a referendum, such a deal is unlikely to be approved anytime soon.

That number seems a bit unbelievably low to me.

If such a deal could be reached and Russia would get the Donbass and some other areas they already have now, why would 96-98% Ukrainians really not want that if it finally brings this terrible war to an end? After all those regions like the Donbass were already nothing but war-torn cesspools (think MH17!) where most of their remaining inhabitants actually prefer to be under the Russian regime for whatever reason. I don't think a normal Ukrainian that just wants to live without war will actually care whether they get these regions back. There's nothing left standing there anyway.

Personally if I were a Ukrainian from Kiev I would definitely not want to risk dying over some distant area full of rebel farmers. Just give them to Putin and see how they like being under his regime (I imagine, not very much). I would just want to live my life again and I wouldn't care about my country's borders being a little smaller. It's just some lines on a map. A matter of 'national pride' is not worth dying over. And life in Ukraine is basically at a standstill. People can't plan for the future, build a career, buy a home etc. That can't continue forever.

The question of course is whether Putin would actually stop forever or if it would just offer him a respite to build up his forces again for round 2. I would assume it would be most likely. But of course, so could Ukraine. Besides, Putin is getting old. We never thought that after Beria and Cruchev someone like Gorbachev would come but he did. Someone else could stand up after Putin and peace might well last.

But anyway, if they want this to continue, so be it. I just think it's unlikely Russia will ever be completely beaten back even if NATO did get involved (and it won't because it would lead to terrible escalation) and who wants another 10 years of war? Yes, Russia was wrong for attacking Ukraine and has committed terrible war crimes but at this point I think a compromise should be reached to stop further loss of life. Ukraine has fought very well to push them back but whatever little Russia has now is not important enough to die over IMO. Lately the victories have been very hard-fought with very nasty losses. Even if the war ended with the current status quo, Ukraine should be really proud of what they have achieved. They would have beaten back the lion.

PS: This might sound harsh sure but I really don't see what they have to gain by fighting to the bitter end to get that Donbass back.

Yes indeed. I stuck with instagram a lot longer because it didn't do this, but now in an attempt to copycat TikTok they've done the same with the home screen that keeps switching back to "For you" instead of "Following". 🤦‍♂️

Did you sign a contract? Then no, probably not.

I'm sure there not being one is the feature. Trapping people into the free tier and getting them on overages.

Of course for a hobby site that will never manage to pay this is not a good business model but I can see how this works for more moderate corporate use.

Is there a customer involved here?

After all if it's for a customer it might be better to just give them the choice since the bill is on them.

Hm yes and no. The user might have angered someone with their website and it might well have been targeted to them instead of Netlify as a whole? I can imagine them using that point in a court if that was the case.

If I were to host on such a service I'd probably put cloudflare in front. Especially as it seems to be static content. But I wouldn't host on a service with unlimited pricing anyway. I'd much rather see my hobby site go down than to have world-class uptime and pay 100k :P

Good to hear but it sounds like if the person hadn't gathered so much traction on HN they might still have been screwed.

Yeah this is why I pay only for services with fixed fees (or that allow me to set a hard limit). Wow, 100k would bankrupt me completely.

Wow I'm surprised so many people still use facebook. In my circles I hardly ever hear from it. People my age (40s) are worried about privacy, the younger generations all prefer insta (30s), tiktok (20s) and other stuff.

I really used to like facebook when it showed me updates of what my friends were doing on the timeline.

But then they moved to this algorithmic "feed" crap which hid some of my friends' updates and inserted random other crap. Then I hated it and the privacy invasion wasn't worth it anymore. If they'd only allowed me to keep the old timeline I probably would still be using it. It just felt like such a drag going through all the bullshit every day trying to find news from my friends.

Of course Gaza is not Biden's fault, absolutely not. I'm not saying that. And I'm very much a 'leftie' (much more left than the democrats are in the US in fact, I would be more like Bernie).

However he could certainly be a bit less unwavering in his support for Netanyahu who is really committing atrocities. If I could vote in the US I would still vote for him, but with a heavy heart. I'm sure he's not happy with what is happening in Gaza but I would prefer a president who would not be afraid to speak up. And I'm really starting to worry about his mental state as I mentioned.

I have no ideas either, sadly... But it would be so nice if someone fresh would actually get a chance.

What you could do of course is vote for someone else in the primaries. After all, it will still be a democrat, it won't affect the outcome of the presidential election and at least your voice of dissent is counted somewhere. If a lot of people do this, maybe some bells will ring at the DNC.

Good that this comes to light, though I'm sure the conspiracy theorists will never be convinced. But it's good to take away lies from the equation.

I do think Biden is the wrong candidate to run for president though. He seems more and more erratic, confusing Mitterand with Macron and Kohl with Merkel (uhm... Not even the same gender!). And his unwavering support for Netanyahu...

I'm really worried about this because obviously Trump is worse. I'm not American so obviously I have no say in this but I worry about this for the effects on the whole world in terms of geopolitical stability, climate etc. But having "Not Trump" as your only selling point is not a good bet IMO. Is America really not ready for a candidate that's a bit younger and actually able to step up to the plate?