gila @ gila @lemm.ee

Posts

0

Comments

354

Joined

2 yr. ago

If you ask me there was definitely a shift during and since the cold war era as our historically progressive parliament started trimming off and shunning its more socialist members and ideas. It follows the the cycle of exploitation following abundance. The Herd put it pretty well in their song 77% (indirectly about separate issues to do with the complacency of Aus voting constituency) - "We rode the sheep's back, now the sheep ride you" (the country got rich off of the rise of agricultural development esp. wool industry during 60s and the primary beneficiaries are now oligarchs)

You might be right. I think I moved after reading this post from the lemmy.world team. Specifically the part:

As the Lemmyverse grows and instances get big, precautions may happen. We will keep monitoring the situation closely, and if in the future we deem it safe, we would gladly reallow these communities.

The fediverse being in a state of fairly continuous growth, 'as it gets big' can refer to any arbitrary point in time over the past couple of years or moving forward. The statement is essentially, we will arbitrate the content on the instance for reasons. That's fine, but not something I personally want out of my instance, so I left. sh.itjust.works was the other instance I considered moving to at the time, and I'd be against the team there defederating politicised instances in the same way. If I were a user there, I'd leave.

It wouldn't really affect me anyway in this case, I got permabanned from lemmygrad.ml (which seems to share banlists with hexbear) for reason "liberal" after pointing out suggestions Trudeau literally voiced support for nazis were being deliberately facetious.

Here in Aus we've had a supermarket duopoly since 1985, it has been terrible for consumers and only gets worse over time, most recently using COVID supply chain disruptions as a guise for increasing sales margin.

The government recently announced a 12-month review into the industry, triggering CEOs to resign and be replaced with scapegoats for their upcoming difficult period.

Things do generally seem to be on the right path, and yet still no one is talking about the only measure which will stop the problem: fixing the merger laws.

From where I'm standing, for the FTC to pre-emptively realise this eventuality and act to intervene represents about a 40-year headstart on us developing sensible policy in the area. And we've actually been dealing with the consequences of the inaction for that time.

Comparing to Activision and Microsoft is total non sequitur, they are world apart in terms of their impact on society and tbh, Microsoft's argument that it can be good for consumers has merit.

Literally the interference is with Cloudflare, i.e competing silly internet restrictions.

You can easily install a harmless Firefox extension and be blocked from all the same sites, for example.

If e_www r are on pig loop

I moved from .world because they defederated dbzer0. They've since refederated though.

Like how servers started defederating dbzer0 for having piracy communities? Sounds great for the fediverse. What's stopping you from just blocking the instances?

It's seen as an investment, yes. Those are important factors for a currency, I agree.

Is there a part where you meant to connect these dots to substantiate the first statement about it being a problem that it's seen as an investment?

Edit: I get it, you're saying it's a problem with the idea that Bitcoin should be used as a currency in everyday transactions. I don't think that's a popular use case for Bitcoin, though. I wouldn't use "digital gold" for everyday transactions, similarly to how I wouldn't use real gold. That's not really a problem with Bitcoin though, more of a misunderstanding of it

It's sad, but as a crypto user I'd be sketched out enough about using a centralised hot wallet app like Exodus in an official capacity, let alone entering my private key in something installed via a 3rd party app store. This probably happens on the Play Store a few times a week, and that's on a bigger platform with a full security review process. It's ultimately unavoidable.

Am noob on debian, it's great. Watched some videos to help introduce me, and it seems like the onboarding experience since 12 is way better than previously.

It's the website that's shitty, not the installer. And you're not stupid OP, the bootable live image installer should be the default download. Make sure you link directly to it in your post, if you do. I should be able to go to the Debian website, hit download and get the best option like I can on the Ubuntu site. I got the normal installer instead, but that was fine for me.

I wouldn't necessarily say I'm representative of the average newbie, as I had brief forays with using Linux many years ago. But it's been painless. It took like an hour to setup, try a couple of DE's, add Flatpack sources and then I was away, back to being immersed in my apps.

Wayland by default, inclusion of nonfree firmware sources, GNOME 43 are highlights for me and reasons why it deserves some focus. New users are coming from Windows, not Fedora. I've tried GNOME 2, that was a problem for me as a windows user. GNOME 43 is not a problem for Windows users, it is literally much more performant and stable. To the point I just realised now that it's an older version when you pointed that out. Could've fooled me.

The reason I tried Debian first is because I wanted a blank slate, especially coming from Win11. That's what I got after minimal and easy configuration. I'm satisfied with it and don't feel curious about trying other distros, at least not right now.

Practically, the biggest obstacle to overcoming EV suppression is Tesla. They are mainly profitable through sales of carbon credits via various emissions offset schemes, which they sell to other manufacturers such that they can show required carbon offsets by just paying some money. A whole lot easier than upending their business model to actually produce EV's, and creates a positive feedback loop where Tesla retains position as only significant EV game in town. The EV development happening right now is targeting China, not the US.

You can rent a server with 32 slots and keep your progression playing with buddies. Better than the joining players having to restart their progression to play in co-op

Feels like you're describing growing out of p2p

I used to download stuff from XDCC bots on IRC. That was even weirder than Usenet, you'd send the bot a specific chat command for it to serve you a file.

I feel like 'my own home streaming service' is effectively what I have in comparison to those days.

I don't think entry level users are what will be converted, at least first. It's users like you and me. Users that, for whatever reason, haven't preferred Linux historically. I've tried the new popular distro every few years to 'check in' with Linux, and each time I ended up running into some issue which reaffirmed my preference for Windows sooner or later.

Until I tried Debian 12 a couple of months ago, that is. Between nonfree drivers, Wayland and its compatibility throughout the ecosystem, and updates to GNOME, it's honestly been refreshingly user-friendly and feels more optimised than Windows.

Importantly, in searching for alternatives to Windows-only software I use, I didn't have any problems and in one case actually ended up finding new software I prefer.

The peace of mind of my OS not trying to sell me something or trying to farm my engagement is nice too, but not why I'd recommend giving it a try. I've always gotten behind it in principle support of free software, but now I can get behind it actually using it. I'd recommend it because it genuinely seems better in my general use.

Agreed, but consider this: centralisation in this context is intended to refer to the distribution of power and control toward any authority or party, including entrenchment of VC. It's definitely a valid point for something like Solana, less so for Ethereum I feel. At a certain point, the sum of involved interests are simply too disparate to be utilised together toward some nefarious end. Of course, robust on-chain community governance is critical for anything that wants to push beyond the microcap experiment stage that Ethereum was in during 2016.

You were supposed to have the eureka moment where you realise that's not a thing, oh well.

I'm pointing out that the DAO hack transactions are not muted on ETC, they still exist as transactions in a validated block on that chain. Whether its state of mutability exists in binary or on a spectrum, ETC is shown to be immutable using your criteria, further showing that it's not as simple as "crypto isn't really immutable". Different chains, even directly originating from the same project, have different characteristics with respect to mutability. It's not to say that ETH is worse and/or better than ETC, or that either of them are good, it's just what's been observed as a matter of record, contrary to your depiction

You've almost put all the pieces together. A decentralised linked list is ... ? oh wait

Then I guess you misunderstand that the hard fork resulting from the DAO hack was the result of consensus of the network participants, not a unilateral action taken by the Ethereum foundation. Indeed, the protocol facilitated that's the only way it could happen.

The historic source code is still hosted, if you think ETH devs have the ability to 'edit whatever they want' then you should be able to point to the lines of code where that ability is afforded to them. Or someone should, 8 years should have been enough time to have a flick through.

Your anti-ETH comment came across as an anti-ETC comment to me, that's why I responded. I stand with you in disagreement with the 2016 hard fork. Mostly because many people would lose money anyway, and did. ETH corrected 50+%.

ETC is literally the original chain, sans Ethereum foundation's branding (which is why your reference to it confused me). Founding members left and continued to support ETC, and went on to found other foundations with a basis in academic rigor, which formed the fundamental basis of the ideological disagreement between participants.

You said this showed ETH/ETC devs have a 'kill switch in their back pocket', but the part of Ethereum that was 'killed' is alive and much larger than it was in 2016.

Well, it's been about 15 years, and everything else we've found so far has been shitter. So just, give up on decentralisation I guess?