ahal @ ahal @lemmy.ca

Posts

1

Comments

399

Joined

2 yr. ago

In theory it could be a good thing. In practice hospitals will lay off a bunch of nurses to save cost, the system will be just as overloaded as ever, except now you talk to cold unfeeling machines instead.

Yeah it could work too. Like you said though it's subjective and internal arguments about what deserves to be big or not sounds tiring :p. For marketing large changes, inventing a buzzword seems to be working well enough.

I guess to each their own, but I kind of like not knowing the version. I just use Firefox and if I really care what's new I can look at the changelog, or see it in the what's new pop-up.

At least for Firefox the average person is getting updated automatically. They'd need to go into about:config to turn it off.

True, but one problem would be that every release would break something as there are just so many changes in each. On this scale SemVer doesn't work that well. It also doesn't really tell you anything about the significance of changes (trivial changes can cause major bumps, or huge new features can be fully backwards compatible).

Dates could work. Though Firefox 2024.03 just doesn't have the same ring to it :p. And they also don't say anything about significance.

In the rapid release model there are no updates bigger than the regularly scheduled releases. So each regularly scheduled release needs to bump the biggest version number. Otherwise the biggest number would never change and there would also be fewer ways to distinguish smaller releases.

This seems to happen when a mastodon user @ mentions another mastodon user who happens to have the same name as a Lemmy community. Pretty unfortunate

I just enabled it and in my library at least it's only games that I purchased on Steam but they go through some other launcher

To all the people defending her, how is this different than just pumping and driving away? You could always pump first and pay inside later, and it works on the honour system. In this case she clearly intentionally circumvented paying.

Yeah, the character development and dialogue is pretty bad. I rave about it for all the cool ideas it exposed me to. I value that more highly than pretty much anything else. To each their own :)

Unlike Game of Thrones, the source material for this is finished. Game of Thrones went to shit once they ran out of source material.

Vertical tabs with named groups that are window specific, are a life saver as you work across projects

I agree a native experience can't be beat, but have you tried using Simple Tab Groups combined with https://github.com/ranmaru22/firefox-vertical-tabs ? It's a pretty damn good combo.

This has nothing to do with technology, it's just petty politics. Legault thinks this will play well with voters in strategic ridings, and that's all this is about.

No.

And that doesn't make me stupid because there exist times I say yes.

It's the year of the wood dragon!

Good context to have!

I'm not commenting on this particular case because I'm uninformed, the Times very well could have completely shit the bed here.

But one difference between a news outlet and an every day citizen is that a news outlet pretty much has to report on what the government's position is. If the white house claims there are WMD's, that's something the public needs to know. Of course the language around how that gets presented is everything!

It sounds like there was too much blind trust in that statement and the language didn't leave enough room for scepticism in this particular case. But it's worth remembering that in other cases there's a difference between towing the line and reporting words as a statement of fact. The fact being that the words were said but not necessarily that the words are true.

Regarding the WMD thing, was it proven the Times was aware of the mistakes and published anyway? Or were they also deceived by the government like everyone else?

I'm not American and I almost never read the Times, so I don't have first hand experience. But I hear the same rhetoric about outlets here in Canada.

My take is that yes, outlets can have bias on certain issues, but that doesn't mean we should write them off completely. Trust in media is at an all time low, journalism is struggling to survive. There's no media outlet in the world that doesn't make the kinds of mistakes that you outline here. The key is how do they respond to them after the fact. Do they issue corrections? How quickly? Where do they put them?

Some of your 'evidence' also doesn't seem like journalistic malpractice. For example, are they obfuscating poor sources, or not revealing an anonymous source? The latter is not malpractice. The former doesn't sound bad either.. Who decides if a source is poor? Maybe the source didn't have much to contribute so that's why there wasn't much detail on their background. I'm not arguing that you're wrong, just that as an outside observer that point doesn't seem very bad.

Anyway, I do think it's important to be aware of any biases in the media we consume, so conversations like this are important. But my fear is that if the conclusion is to wholesale stop trusting the media anytime they make a mistake or a bias is revealed (I.e all media outlets), we're going to be even more fucked than we already are.

https://www.worldwildlife.org/industries/palm-oil#:~:text=Impacts,-%C2%A9%20Hartmut%20Jungius&text=Large%20areas%20of%20tropical%20forests,including%20rhinos%2C%20elephants%20and%20tigers.

They have their own transmitters over cellular network.

NPM is the way. SSL without ever needing to edit a config file.