If you wonder why we can't update the VLC on Android version, it's because Google refuses to let us update:
either we give them our private signing keys,
or we drop support for Android TV before API-30, and all our users on TV API<30 can't get fixes.
It's not much, just dozens of millions of people use Android TV before Android-11...
Maybe we should tell users to buy new TVs?
electronicWaste
I can't speak to why they're not updating on FDroid but seeing as how it's much more difficult to get people to use FDroid on Android TV, I don't think it will help them with that issue anyway.
Should note this is not permanent. It's only for the extent of the spending bill, which is until October, and can be easily removed from the spending bills after the election, when hopefully we have a more blue congress that won't need to make these shitty concession just to fund the damn government.
Be prepared for a lot of hand-wringing about "security".
Apple, Microsoft, and Google all learned in the last couple years "security" shuts down any arguments, and they use it at every turn to justify whatever they want, regardless of the actual dangers or alternative mitigation methods they could take.
If our modern software security means anti-competitive behavior and user lock-in tactics are OK, then that's a problem with our security practices, and we need to reevaluate some things.
I'm willing to take the movement as a good sign. The fact that we haven't even been talking about this shit for decades now was just depressing. It's long past time for this shit, and the ball needs to get rolling.
I think it more likely that over time, after threads has captured enough of the user base fleeing Twitter and other social media platforms, threads will start pushing a sub-fediverse of sorts that will involve most of the major fediverse platforms, i.e. the ones run by people who attend the get togethers Meta invites them to. Slowly but surely that will be cemented as the primary "section" of the fediverse, "the Meta-fediverse", and in order to join it, you'll have to commit to their standards. And just like that, the decentralized platform has become centralized.
They're willing to play with all the kids on the playground right now, but that will change. It's bizarre to me that the fediverse has such a strong population of left-leaning users, that all came here spitting on the capitalist-poisoned platforms they fled, and yet somehow there are so many people around here that don't see the danger of letting Meta in. They will find a way to fuck all of this up.
Committing to the idea of the fediverse will not benefit their bottom line in the long run. It is antithetical to the platform dominance that creates their profits.
It's probably not true anymore, but at the time this guy was being radicalized, you're right, it wasn't algorithmically catered to them. At least not in the sense that it was intentionally exposing them to a specific type of content.
I suppose you can think of the way reddit works (or used to work) as being content agnostic. The algorithm is not aware of the sorts of things it's suggesting to you, it's just showing you things based on subreddit popularity and user voting, regardless of what it is.
In the case of YouTube and Facebook, their algorithms are taking into account the actual content and funneling you towards similar content algorithmically, in a way that is unique to you. Which means at some point their algorithm is acknowledging "this content has problematic elements, let's suggest more problematic content"
(Again, modern reddit, at least on the app, is likely engaging in this now to some degree)
Also worth remembering, this opens up avenues for lawsuits on other types of "harm".
We have states that have outlawed abortion. What do those sites do when those states argue social media should be "held accountable" for all the women who are provided information on abortion access through YouTube, Facebook, reddit, etc?
Attempts to moderate away the worst examples of it just result in people making variations that don't technically violate the rules.
The problem then becomes if the clearly defined rules aren't enough, then the people that run these sites need to start making individual judgment calls based on...well, their gut, really. And that creates a lot of issues if the site in question could be held accountable for making a poor call or overlooking something.
The threat of legal repercussions hanging over them is going to make them default to the most strict actions, and that's kind of a problem if there isn't a clear definition of what things need to be actioned against.
Depends on what you mean by "encouraged". That is going to need a very precise definition in these cases.
And the point isn't that people shouldn't be held accountable, it's that there are a lot of gray areas here, we need to be careful how we navigate them. Irresponsible rulings or poorly implemented laws can destabilize everything that makes the internet worthwhile.
I know there’s a ton of skepticism about Meta entering the fediverse — it’s completely understandable,” Cottle says. “I do want to kind of make a plea that I think everyone on the team has really good intentions. We really want to be a good member of the community and give people the ability to experience what the fediverse is.”
Your intentions mean exactly nothing when you're being paid by Zuckerberg.
It also doesn't actually matter what you intend, because the problem isn't just what the platform can do, it's about Meta being in this space and trying to stake a claim in it. We came here to escape you. Go the fuck away.
Forcing people to migrate to a worse version of their platform.
A worse version they're paying for.
Thankfully Microsoft said they're supporting classic Outlook through 2029. Otherwise pushing New Outlook as it exists now, without reducing the license price accordingly, would be almost straight up robbery.
But I have a sneaking suspicion that in the years to come they're going to start removing access to classic Outlook from more of the 365 licensing options. You already can't use it on F3 and some others, eventually they'll pull it from everything expect the higher tiers as a way of forcing companies to move.
And you can bet your ass they'll warn them sternly about 3rd party mail clients. Those "security risks" will keep them from seeking any alternatives, even if they're completely safe.
Too many "I like to tinker more than I like my software to work" options
I fail to see how this is a problem. What are you suggesting here? Eliminate all those options so it looks nicer?
Legitimately, what makes New Outlook so fucking awful is that they did exactly this. They cut out half of the actual usability, options, and functionality of Outlook to make a "clean, lightweight experience". And it's objectively terrible as a replacement.
This sentiment that software needs to get dumber because people can't stand having to look at a bunch of options can seriously die in a fire.
From their Twitter:
I can't speak to why they're not updating on FDroid but seeing as how it's much more difficult to get people to use FDroid on Android TV, I don't think it will help them with that issue anyway.