OneMeaningManyNames @ whydudothatdrcrane @lemmy.ml

Full time smug prick

---

Read more

Posts

53

Comments

386

Joined

1 yr. ago

Great point.

it doesn’t make sense when there’s no incentive to sell

I assume the cost of transition is sth that should be justified. Even learning to use the software is a kind of cost structure in itself. So, they need to understand why it is worth it.

always somebody to blame for missing features or outages

It tracks. But there are possibly responses to that, like open source business models that are based on long term support or an enterprise subscription.

OK with laughing over your own joke, but if you burst out and are not even able to finish uttering it, then I think this is a bit childish.

I could sit down and explain transgender issues to a good faith person that is not up-to-date with the terminology or what is considered offensive, or intersex topics. But people being so sensitive to not being called bigoted when shouting their transphobia from the rooftops, it has pissed me off to the extent I can't assume good faith anymore.

it is a skill issue for users to get over

I can't explore the details right now. I believe that usability should be addressed by OSS developers. I believe in educating users as I believe in better funding initiatives to achieve that, as I believe in people also paying to OSS a fraction of what they pay to closed source corpos.

OK if you insist, let's point out that just because people can look at the code and find vulnerabilities, this does not mean they automatically do. Just because it is open source it does not mean automatically it is secure nor private. I hope everybody reading this understands that. On the other hand, there are analyses on why the XZ thing happened, for example this one looking at bullying in the community and pressure for fixes. Without following the communities regularly and researching there is no point in being a passive consumer of open source products. Having said that, with proprietary software the opportunity to audit the code is not even there to start with, eg you have to take a provider's like Microsoft's or Telegram's word for their encryption. Let's not forget to address the misconception that viruses can't be written for Linux. They can. Also persistent actors are willing and able to compromise open source and even air-gapped systems.

This reminds me of an older discussion about Matrix vs. Discord. Someone said that Matrix does not even have to look like (or even have comparable features to ) Discord for it is a proprietary for-profit and they have lots of people working on streamlining things and adding features. This includes the "visual appeal" of the GUI of course. Some people might find that important. If you ask me people should learn to use the shell in elementary education, so this discussion about dumbed down users (who expect a big magic button that next to reads their minds) has other angles beyond catering to that specific type of user. Because this user has been conditioned by a huge corporate ecosystem of marketers and front end developers. Interesting point for extending this discussion nonetheless.

E2EE by default and decentralized (if I’m not mistaken)

You are not mistaken, Jami is both.

They are OK with free when it is closed source and harvests their data. In fact, some dev said that people would spend 30$ on burgers and beer for an outing, but spending 1$ to support an OSS app is unthinkable. In turn this makes developers to rely[^1] on ads and data harvesting which makes things worse for everyone.

[^1]: I don't know if I agree, because I will never rely to such monetization methods, but who knows, perhaps there are some people with ethics that have no other way to make ends meet. I believe it is the whole culture that promotes these practices as acceptable, and you can see the opposite in this community or in places like FDroid/Droidify where it is not acceptable to monetize in such ways. People just don't do it.

How so? What do you recommend then?

See, I am not the guy who will stop thinking for myself because experts say there is no evidence of sth. I am not saying that there is real time eavesdropping at all times, but I have not seen convincing arguments that a working microphone cannot be used for pushing ads by simple and widely available mechanisms. In fact, the sheer amount of people who complain about this should be considered evidence in itself, especially when they never had thought of a given topic before discussing it with someone. I have considered phone proximity and shared IP address but they don't seem to make an exhaustive explanation. I think that some stories point to Meta doing this extensively, and that disallowing microphone access for Meta products alleviates the effect. Many privacy communities I believe they are infested by spooks and trolls pushing disinformation narratives, and one of them is that phones are NOT listening as a smart thing to say and/or believe. I might as well think that this is itself can be related to the redacted part in the rationale to ban Tik Tok. Having said that, I think that the only feasible to do this technically is by a regularly updated list of keywords, rather than other ways that would leave a processing or networking footprint.

Dude, the rest of the world elects Hitler wannabe's like all the time.

Project 2025 was considered unique in detailing how to get rid of checks and balances, ergo terminate democracy.

I thought it was considered unique in detailing how to get rid of checks and balances, ergo terminate democracy.

don’t know where to start looking

Ergo first order of business, construct such list.

1. Whether phones are listening or not
2. What is the redacted part in the rationale to ban Tik Tok

A note on the latter, it is presented as national security threat. They won't say what it is. I presume because some of the shit they don't want a foreign power doing is sth they very much do themselves.

Trump administration hasn't even started yet, and we already have public space segregation based on a protected characteristic.

C'mon dude, they just asked you to copy a quote from the Capital, not to recite a whole brochure with the latest analysis on imperialism. And/or swear by it,

It is the most basic common ground for every left wing person and a monumental text in modern Western literacy.

Most people I would care to discuss with should have a basic understanding of what is written in there, and I believe it is the same for people running their own instance.

If you take such a vehement stance against "quoting" Das Kapital, then you probably you lie so much off center that I would personally could have no productive discussion with you.

I mean, even the notion that this is some kind of pledge of allegiance is suspicious enough in its own sake, like letting us on you believe leftists are somehow indoctrinated[^1]. I you weren't a little removed about Das Kapital you could even subvert the text by quoting something out of context so that it says something unintended by the authors.

But indeed, if you are turned off by this playful screening question, then it only shows that such screening serves its purpose most effectively.

[1]: To be frank lemmy.ml does not even defederate neoliberal instances, so perhaps there is a paradigm shift for you right there.

This part is funny

I am sorry but you are wrong: This bit is beyond funny.

So you are a mind reader now?

I used to think it stood for machine learning.