1. 5

    I love blender, one of the most amazing pieces of free software out there that proves you can compete with commercial software. It’s a shame youtube is doing this to such a great project.

    1.  

      I am updating Merit’s ambassador reward and invite distribution algorithm. The community voted on changes they wanted to the algorithm, and I am implementing them in the Merit Core software. It’s quite exciting to work on a decentralized software project because we can’t dictate that users will upgrade the software unless they have a good reason. Since the changes we are making are based on what the community wanted, then the likelihood of adoption is pretty high. Also unlike many different projects, the new features are turned on essential via a timed feature switch. So we must deploy the software with the feature disabled, and it automatically is enabled at a future date. Timed feature switches are necessary because most people on the network must turn on the feature at the same time for it to function, or else you get a hard fork in the blockchain.

      1. 26

        I’ve never been part of a standup that hasn’t devolved into “make yesterday sound productive” competitions/drivels. I think there are a few causes:

        • Stakeholders are present so engineers are vouching for their team
        • Managers are present so engineers are vouching for their raises
        • Engineers are afraid to look lazy when compared to their peers

        So, to make standups more productive I’d remove Stakeholders, Managers, and Engineers from the meeting.

        😉

        Edit: I was being playful, but I don’t think standups are useful meetings… at all. The idea that you should wait until the next day to bring up that you’re blocked seems ridiculous to me. However, if I were to run them this would be the format.

        • What are you doing today?
        • Is anything blocking you?

        Note how there’s no “what did you do yesterday?” Talking about yesterday would be strictly forbidden. Not only does it run a high risk of turning into drivel, but everyone already attended yesterdays standup, so it’s purely redundant information.

        1. 6

          everyone already attended yesterdays standup, so it’s purely redundant information.

          That very much depends on team context. I’ve worked on teams where that is mostly (though not always) true. And I’ve worked on teams where what people said they were going to do ended up varying dramatically from what they actually ended up doing.

          During peak season for one of my company’s sub-products, the development team supporting that product is very likely to be pulled into debugging production issues. Occasionally a team member’s expertise is urgently needed by another team. And of course, if you say more than one thing in your list of intentions, if anything takes longer than expected, then the rest of your intended actions may or may not relate.

          It’s important not only to communicate what it is that you are trying to do, but also what you actually ended up doing so that if the source of change is a problem somehow, that problem can be addressed.

          1. 2

            Where does it say you have to wait until next standup to bring up blockers? The ‘What did you do yesterday, today, and what are your blockers’ is just a training exercise to get novices trained to bring up blockers daily. It’s to get people into a habit if bringing them up every day. Believe it or not, some people will struggle for weeks with blockers until they bring them up, or quietly fail. This is especially true for newer people in the field.

          1. 0

            Don’t treat them like a status meeting. They are meant to be a mini sprint planner. They are for replanning the sprint daily. See “Daily Scrum” in http://www.scrumbook.org/

            1. 1

              How do you “replan the sprint” without understanding the status of open tasks?

              Basically, your current status is the input to replanning—are you done with that task that was planned to take 3 days after only 1 day? Better pull something else into the sprint!

              1. 0

                You are correct that status is important for planning. I agree and didn’t say status isn’t involved, or isn’t important, just pointing out it isn’t the goal of the meeting. As I said, they are not status meetings but planning meetings.

            1. [Comment removed by author]

              1. 3

                Five minutes per person!! That sounds interminable. One minute per person, including (short!!) clarifying questions from other members, seems like a much more reasonable limit. Standups are strictly for orientation; any meaningful or deeper conversation should occur elsewhere.

                edit: I see I agree with jpatrick, basically.

                1. -1

                  The goal is to let people know you are working on things and the kind of things you are working on

                  The goal is to replan the sprint. It is a mini planner.

                  See “Daily Scrum” in http://www.scrumbook.org/

                1. 17

                  Standups should not

                  • Try to resolve an issue live
                    Don’t try to trouble shoot something or hash out details in a standup. Use the standup to report it, then grab someone after the meeting. Otherwise you are wasting everyone time. This one drives me nuts as it seems to happen in my stand ups all the time.

                  • Include a measure of how productive you are.
                    If you need that measure there are burn downs. Also its generally a good idea to not include any unnecessary management, as that does tend things to devolve into ‘make yesterday sound productive’ as @pab said.

                  • Be longer than 1 minute per person.
                    You want to report your current position, and where you are going. If it takes you more than 60 seconds to report this you are probably running into the prior two bullet points.

                  • Be longer than 10 minutes in total.
                    You don’t want to give time for devs to glaze over. If its taking longer either brevity is suffering from loquacious individuals, or the team may be getting too big.

                  • Happen prior to caffeination, lunch adjacent (unless team eats together), or near EOD
                    Stands ups should facilitate follow up communication between members. You want people be alert enough to help, but during a time where they wanting to wrap something because they have something else to do at that time.

                  1. 2

                    Yup. I think you hit the nail on the head. I did stand ups years ago as project lead. First 5-10 mins of work: 1) what are you doing 2) any foreseeable pain points, connect with your peers that your tasks need you to coordinate on.

                    Done. Everyone thought they were extremely productive (to my knowledge).

                    1. 2

                      Some tools that we use to achieve these goals:

                      • It is always OK and preferable for someone to say “can we / you continue this discussion after the daily?”. Not everything that is currently interesting and relevant you is that to everyone. It is very easy to forget this when you get excited!

                      • Keep everything short: It is OK if there is nothing peculiar happening or you don’t need input/help!

                      • Always briefly go through every task which has been worked on since last daily. From end of the process pipeline to the beginning (in our current case: task moved to production -> tasks moved to ready -> tasks moved to review -> tasks moved to in progress -> stories taken to in progress -> stories groomed to backlog). There is couple reasons for this “backwards” order. First it gives personal productivity measure (I deployed/did stuff that needs review/etc). Secondly it creates natural pull for people to review and take new tasks/stories to be worked on, which removes insane amount of that fruitless “is this the next thing, or this, or this” kind of conversation. Having physical kanban wall makes this really easy by the way.

                      • First couple items in the tip of the backlog are in strict priority order, so when previous story is done one just needs to take next one to be worked on. No need to converse about this during daily.

                      • Pick a time when daily starts. Be very strict about this. Making others to wait is rude, no one is that important.

                      Currently our team is 16 people, our dailies take 5 to 15 minutes. Depending on how much churn there has been.

                      1. 1

                        FYI The first known recorded standup from the highly productive Borland Quattro pro team was an hour long. Standups should be mini planner meetings, not status meetings.

                      1. 4

                        TLDR: C++ is a system programming language that is established and in active development.

                        1. 7

                          And super-complicated. So, you can take pride in learning a specific, super-complicated thing. I’d advise that effort instead go into learning a codebase of critical app to improve it.

                          1. 3

                            Turns out a lot of critical apps are written in C++ ….

                        1. 14

                          When I was learning C++, it felt to me like very little of that knowledge was transferable. I wasn’t learning concepts or techniques that I could apply elsewhere, just the idiosyncrasies of C++. I guess that depends on what experience you bring into it; I picked it up relatively late in my computer life. It’s come in handy at some jobs, though; there’s always that legacy system that no-one really wants to touch, and I get to feel like a badass for volunteering. So for me, the value of learning C++ is simply that I can work on existing code, as well as read/learn from cool projects that happen to be written in it. I don’t think it’s rewarding in itself, but I agree on your point about confidence.

                          1. 6

                            it felt to me like very little of that knowledge was transferable. I wasn’t learning concepts or techniques that I could apply elsewhere, just the idiosyncrasies of C++.

                            That’s a good way to phrase it, I thought that as well, but failed to articulate it. Also, c++ is the ultimate technical interview “stump the chump” quizz show language. I was once on a java interview, and I have c++ on my resume because I used to use it a lot. The interviewer started in on some c++ questions. I said ‘woah, is this a c++ position here?” No, it’s java was the reply. “Let’s stick to java shall we?” I did not get an offer, wouldn’t have accepted anyway.

                            1. 4

                              it felt to me like very little of that knowledge was transferable. I wasn’t learning concepts or techniques that I could apply elsewhere, just the idiosyncrasies of C++

                              Same here. Later, I learned it was features of wildly-different languages merged together in a C-compatible way. Then, they kept extending it. The result is a mess of a language. PreScheme and Modula-3 had cleaner, consistent designs with plenty of features. With good design, they also compile really fast. Slow compiles were a major factor in keeping me away from C++. For modern stuff, D’s design eliminated that with many benefits. Rust was slow to compile last I looked but brought major benefits to justify it. Nim has nice syntax, macros, and C compatibility. Idk about compile times.

                              So, looking at competition, I find C++ to just be unnecessarily hard to learn and use due to its design choices. Different design choices could’ve improved syntax, safety, compile time, or even more runtime efficiency. The good news is there’s alternatives now with decent ecosystems, one a great ecosystem. Unless doing legacy code, I’d say invest effort into one or more of those instead. Further, remember that ports of legacy components don’t necessarily require knowing the language: one might team up with a person that knows that language for them to translate the code for you into pseudocode or something.

                              1. 5

                                Yeah, Rust is my weapon of choice for new projects. Compile times are pretty bad on my old T420, but is slowly improving. I am eagerly looking forward to possible alternative backends for debug builds.

                                1. 2

                                  I keep using C++ for two reasons. One, Bjarne is the greatest language designer because he never gave up and created a language that is only becoming more relevant over time. Other designers give up and end up making new languages, one after another. Two, it turns out the world is a messy place and C++ has lots of symmetry breaking features. “Clean elegant” languages fail to make programming for humans as easy.

                                  1. 4

                                    What is the value in a symmetry breaking feature?

                                    1. 2

                                      I think one is addressed mostly by the economic and social side of it like with C/UNIX’s spread. It can be an advantage but allows for designing better languages that similarly use ecosystem power. Even lots of C++ compatibility without as many disadvantages. ZL was an attempt that gets no attention. On your second point, C++ seems to have unnecessary complexity and performance impact vs its competitors which mean it’s unclean or inelegant for unjustified reasons. A better C++ could be created that reduced the difficulties or gave even more benefits justifying dealing with the language complexity. I already named some doing that.

                                      There’s definitely a lot of critical apps written in C++, though. Very unfortunate, too, since I wanted to apply strong assurance technology to some of them. There was hardly anything to use compared to C. The learning curve was also huge compared to some others. Had to back off on that but still thinking conceptually about translaters, including like ZL.

                                1. 5

                                  We released pool mining for Merit recently and I’m working on integrating pool mining directly inside our desktop wallet. The wallet uses electron and I just released a new library called libmeritminer that I wrote and nodejs wrapper called merit-miner-node. Integrating C++ code into electron was fairly painless but has more boilerplate than I enjoy.

                                  In addition, This week I am going to start work on community support outlined in the bluepaper.

                                  1. 3

                                    Working on integrating mining into our new Merit Wallet Electron App. I built a new library to mine Merit and a node module to integrate it into our electron app. This isn’t my first time integrating C++ into a scripting language, however, it is my first time integrating with node.

                                    Does anyone know the best way to package the dynamic libraries with the electron App? It isn’t clear where to put them in the docs.

                                    1. 11

                                      overreaching Code of Conducts.

                                      The author realizes that you don’t have to follow the code of conduct to use the software? Also 80% of the items on the freebsd code of conduct are illegal. the four that stick out to me that aren’t are these.

                                      Comments that reinforce systemic oppression related to gender, gender identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, mental illness, neurodiversity, physical appearance, body size, age, race, or religion.

                                      Unwelcome comments regarding a person’s lifestyle choices and practices, including those related to food, health, parenting, drugs, and employment.

                                      Deliberate misgendering.

                                      Deliberate use of “dead” or rejected names.

                                      Author basically feels that if the developers can’t get intimately involved with another developer’s personal life without consent then the author does not want to use the software. Frankly it seems like you could just create a code of conduct with the line “Thinking code of conducts are bad” and you’d filter out everyone who apparently wants to get in your grill.

                                      The other rules are okayish but would rule out basically everything if applied strictly.

                                      1. 11

                                        Also 80% of the items on the freebsd code of conduct are illegal.

                                        Code’s of conduct don’t have anything to do with law, though. An organization can block your participation in it for any reason they see fit. There are restrictions for businesses and employers, but they don’t apply to open source projects.

                                        1. 17

                                          Right and if you don’t agree with those reasons you don’t have to contribute or you can create your own organization. I was saying 80% of them are illegal to do as an individual. Sexual harassment? Stalking? Threatening? A lot of the CoC is basically just “We won’t enable your criminal behavior and allow you to use the organization as a way to find targets”. The 4 here are basically, “Don’t purposely be an asshole to other members, here are four ways of being an asshole that are explicitly not allowed.”. If you think Open Source means “I get to be a dick to other people and get away with it because it’s not a job” then you’re honestly doing more harm than good and should do something else with your life.

                                          1. 6

                                            Oh sorry, I misunderstood what you mean by illegal. I thought you were saying much of the CoC was illegal.

                                            1. 14

                                              The 4 here are basically, “Don’t purposely be an asshole to other members, here are four ways of being an asshole that are explicitly not allowed.”.

                                              That kind of playing with definitions is one of reasons I fight broad Codes of Conduct. It’s not how they play out. Instead, those promoting or enforcing will be specific groups of people having specific, political views on everything from words to identity to societal structures, expecting the entire world to comply with those views, and punishing anyone in their immediate setting who doesn’t using whatever methods are available. Those methods range from shaming to exclusion to removing their ability to pay bills.

                                              To me, that sounds like being assholes that shove their politics down others’ throats telling them to get lost if they don’t like it. Even more so when I see plenty of people be civil without going that far in mischaracterizing or banning other groups’ means of expressing themselves. Then, a person supporting such politics shows up saying it’s just about not being an asshole. People reading that get a different impression than “no political disagreement or differences are allowed in this list of categories whose reach increases whenever we say.” I don’t expect more honesty from most promoters about the goals since subterfuge and “end justifies the means” is the norm in that group.

                                              1. 12

                                                What about it shoves politics? I would think all the points I mentioned are basically apolitical. There’s no rule against “political disagreement” within the CoC. You can be super hard line conservative and still follow these rules. I’m specifically talking about the FreeBSD CoC.

                                                1. 7

                                                  It’s not really based on “politics”, but on basic respect. If you’re a conservative who is respectful of people’s preferred names and doesn’t shit all over people because of their lifestyles, you won’t have a problem. If you’re a liberal or Leftist who is super racist, anti-Semitic (hello, tankies) or constantly judges poor people overly harshly (of which there are many), you will have one.

                                                  That said, if you feel that trans people asserting that we should be called by the names we choose for ourselves is somehow a political act, then yes, the purpose of the CoC is to “shove politics down your throat”.

                                                  1. 1

                                                    if you feel that trans people asserting that we should be called by the names we choose for ourselves is somehow a political act

                                                    Isn’t it? I have no problem with calling you as you like, really.

                                                    And I’d like it would be the common ground of our international culture.

                                                    But it is Politics. I’d argue that it’s the best expression of politics at all, as it establish a kind environment where we can confront on.

                                                    On the other hand, “keep the discourse on topic or you will be banned” should be a pretty good CoC, everywhere.

                                                    Now, if we can go off-topic, and you tell on a public space (say IRC or a mailing list) you do something I consider bad, you are engadging a discourse. You can’t say “I like eating people, cannibalism improve my health” and than invoke the CoC if anyone object.

                                                    People should understanding that speaking in public implies a will to listen.
                                                    More exactly, speaking implies a will to challenge own opinions, putting them at stake in the conversation.

                                                    If you don’t want to listen any objection, if you don’t want to change your mind, why speak in the first place?
                                                    Are you doing propaganda? Marketing? If so, you are the problem, not who engage with you.

                                                    Also, if we can go off-topic, and you tell you like to hurt your children, I’ll comment on that, whatever the CoC. After the denounce obviously, with all the reference I can get to find you (including your email, ip, os, whatever I can get through my technical knowledge and tools).

                                                    So in general, the CoC is a political tool. It could be used for good or evil.

                                                    But it doesn’t fix the lack of a democratic culture of dialoge in a community.

                                                  2. 1

                                                    Without a CoC you are at the mercy of the hidden political views of the project owners. Their decisions to ban start looking arbitrary. Either way, you deal with political views. Wouldn’t you prefer to know what they are before engaging? Worst would be spending a lot of your time on a project only to find out you get banned because you said something that was in disagreement with the owners of the project.

                                              2. 14

                                                They are too broad (e.g. large swaths of the population would violate it by with their daily interactions), which puts selective enforcement at charge. If its selective enforcement, then its just an power instrument with the rule makers at the power end, even if the contents of the CoC are all well-meaned and good in their intentions.

                                                Its not directly about the contents of the CoC, its about taking peoples moral autonomy.

                                                1. 12

                                                  I think it’s reasonable to treat open source work within an organization with the same level of respect and dignity that you would expect from a job. You could get fired at a job for nearly every one of these. Using dead names even, if an employee asks you to stop and you don’t and they file a complaint against HR, HR might decide that you’re creating a hostile work environment for basically no reason. Most people don’t get fired for misconduct, so I’m going to actually say that you can’t possibly be right about that claim.

                                                  Keep in mind that the responses are

                                                  A private reprimand from the working group to the individual(s) involved.

                                                  A public reprimand.

                                                  An imposed vacation from FreeBSD Project controlled spaces (e.g. asking someone to “take a week off” from a mailing list or IRC).

                                                  A permanent or temporary ban from some or all FreeBSD Project controlled spaces (events, meetings, mailing lists, IRC, etc.)

                                                  A request for a public or private apology.

                                                  A request to engage in mediation and/or an accountability plan.

                                                  These aren’t that extreme. Sure you can be banned but that can happen in any OSS project where they can say “We won’t accept pull requests from dirt bags like you.”. In this case the things you can do wrong are at least actually laid out so that you know what behaviors to avoid and which ones to follow.

                                                  1. 16

                                                    Still, the CoC assumes moral authority over me, which is an no-go for freedom lovers and hackers like me. That people like you don’t exercise their own moral autonomy and fail to understand that others do (with different results) is the reason why CoC create unnecessary controversy and drama.

                                                    And yes, the FreeBSD CoC makes me feel violated in my moral autonomy, and yes, the FreeBSD CoC embodies political views i do not share.

                                                    1. 9

                                                      A CoC has no moral authority and frankly morality isn’t even a real thing. It’s merely a set of rules that people who work together have agreed to follow while working together. You don’t have to work with them and you don’t have to use their software, but since you wanted to be on record disagreeing, I wanted to be on record agreeing with CoC and why I feel the way I do.

                                                      1. 4

                                                        Again, this is a strong pro-CoC statement. If they are successful in excluding people like you, they are working as intended.

                                                        1. 10

                                                          I was hoping to keep things civil. Perhaps there’s a more generous way you could phrase this?

                                                          1. 5

                                                            Not really, given that the author has emphatically stated their disagreement with either the values motivating the rules, or the rules themselves. Regardless, such a person is a real risk to the health of the community, and it’s nice that there’s such an effective repellent.

                                                            1. 18

                                                              I’m honest about not being a feminist. I consider the concept of gender harmful (from an philosophical standpoint), but people like you seem seem convinced that not sharing your point on that makes me an bad person.

                                                              But thanks for determining i’m a hazard to community, it surely helped me to recognize the superiority of your standpoint.

                                                              1. 7

                                                                By “considering the concept of gender harmful” you are willfully ignorant to the way that society works and by effect you are a part of the problem creating inequality and fostering an environment where harassment and hate crimes can thrive.

                                                                You don’t get to invent your own reality and pretend this one doesn’t exist.

                                                                1. 16

                                                                  Yeah also you can consider gender harmful without refusing to respect how other people would like to be referred to. For example I will now out of respect for your disdain for the concept of gender refer to you strictly in non-gendered nouns. Notice how I disagreed with your viewpoint but didn’t invalidate your identity.

                                                                2. 1

                                                                  I don’t care about your honesty. I don’t care to have you recognize the superiority of my viewpoint; I know nothing I can say will sway you. I care to prevent you from contaminating the spaces I care about.

                                                                  1. 22

                                                                    You’ve and @liwakura have both explained well how you differ fundamentally, and I appreciate that. This comment is pulling that discussion into a dark place, please don’t continue on this theme casting someone as an unredeemable danger who must be eradicated. Lobsters is not good at being “Tinder, but for finding a nemesis”.

                                                                  2. 2

                                                                    You don’t fight the concept of gender by standing on the sidelines watching those that do have the concept of gender dominate half the population. Just because you believe there isn’t gender, doesn’t mean people who consider themselves women aren’t getting the short end of the stick in our society.

                                                                  3. 3

                                                                    thanks, that’s much clearer. :)

                                                            2. 6

                                                              You could get fired at a job for nearly every one of these.

                                                              Depends on the job. Many employers won’t punish people who have political differences. Especially in Mid-South where we’re quite a diverse bunch of liberals, conservatives, white, black, latino, etc. The rule is that we either avoid those topics entirely to keep things civil or you better be able to take the kind of discussion you were dishing out. Essentially, we recognize those claiming disagreement is “offensive” to just be silencing their opposition. They’re trying to attack and control the other person. People still try that but don’t get far.

                                                              So, in such a truly, inclusive environment, people will be saying things that bother others since there’s conflict on a deep level. My relatives and I have worked in many such places. They’ll have heated arguments sometimes. It almost always ends up “agree to disagree” with them making up for it being nice to each other later. Sometimes people figure out who each other are underneath, permanently dislike each other, work together just enough to get the job done, and avoid one another otherwise.

                                                              People almost never quit over this sort of thing. It’s also not what most gripe about. Those griping or quitting over assholes bring up people who folks in every group agree are assholes. We wouldn’t need a CoC to deal with them. Just decent managers or owners that respond to employee complaints. If managers or owners aren’t decent, then no policies or CoC’s are going to make the work environment better.

                                                              1. 13

                                                                I really don’t understand how you got this from the CoC mentioned. There is no rule in the CoC that you must conform politically. I would be very shocked to hear that the entire FreeBSD team is not conservative. The rule is merely that you treat other people with dignity. I live in the south and every single one of my workplaces would fit this CoC save for maybe the rules around transgendered folks. Frankly even when I was a deeply religious and hardline conservative I would have no trouble following these rules. I never treated anyone less than human because they had different views than me. Furthermore that “rule” you gave is a kind of CoC and CoC’s matter once the size of the organization grows. Its very easy to fall into a tyranny of structurelessness as an organization gets larger. This is because nobody can agree on what is right or wrong or what the response should be to a problem. By having a CoC you can agree as an org what actions are against the group and what a good response looks like. If you don’t have any response strategy mob mentality kicks in and things can escalate to threats and violence. After all if someone is a huge asshole and nobody is doing anything about it it would seem natural to find a way to make them stop.

                                                                Frankly there’s nothing in this CoC that has any bias against conservatives whatsoever. Nothing in the CoC says you have to be a liberal, and it specifically protects people from false claims. Your micro-CoC actually fails to protect individuals from false claims.

                                                                Publication of non-harassing private communication without consent.

                                                                Publication of non-harassing private communication with consent but in a way that intentionally misrepresents the communication (e.g., removes context that changes the meaning).

                                                                Knowingly making harmful false claims about a person.

                                                                1. 11

                                                                  Depends on the job. Many employers won’t punish people who have political differences.

                                                                  This is such a disingenuous frame shift of the issue that it invalidates everything else about your argument. Being respectful is not political. Enforcing consent in interactions is not political. Being gay or tolerant of same is not political. Asserting that any effort to shift culture away from the status quo is an out-of-bounds “political” act is a cowardly way to attempt to silence those that you disagree with. You are personally guilty, to an incredibly advanced degree, of every evil thing you claim to be against.

                                                                  “Politics” is the process by which humans come to consensus for shared interests. Shitting on the less powerful and providing moral or intellectual cover for those that seek to do the same is not politics; it’s craven thuggery disguised as keeping things peaceful.

                                                                  1. 0

                                                                    Politics is whatever action affects the polis, and by extension any group of humans.

                                                                    Thus being respectful is political.
                                                                    Enforcing consent in interactions is political.
                                                                    Being tolerant of anything is political.

                                                                    In Italy we have the same kind of differences that @nickpsecurity describes, and we are used to joke about our differences a lot. And we debate harshly about many things, but usually these debates grow our relations.

                                                                    As an example, I had a girlfriend that was a deeply religious Catholic when I was atheist (and rather angry at Church). And we talked a lot about religion and politics back then, without that affecting negatively the relation.

                                                                    One of the best engineer I worked with voted for the worst political party we had in Italy for decades. I had the opposite view. We debated a lot. We debated so much about politics that when we had to design a framework together to under a huge pressure, we keep debating with the same style. And after 10 years in production, the framework still rocks the customers are satisfied and we can’t find anything remotely on par with it around.
                                                                    Why? Because we were used to listen deeply and respectfully the other’s opinion.

                                                                    1. 2

                                                                      I grant that being tolerant is political, and so it follows that everything is political. Which means that my point is still relevant: it’s disingenuous to dismiss concerns about behavior as “political”, as though that made it irrelevant.

                                                                      In Italy, you are allowed to have those debates because the stakes are much lower: you’re less likely to die from poverty, your livelihood is less contingent upon social approval, etc.

                                                                      In the United States, it’s not like that. If you lose your job, you could die. If you are systematically excluded from high-paying industries, like digital technology, your quality of life massively suffers in comparison to those who are welcomed by that industry. All policies must be considered in the context of an entrenched and reactionary old guard that dominates all other effects. Any overt attempt to improve the lives of the marginalized is treated as a threat to the old order, and rightfully so. The stakes are literally life and death.

                                                                      Mr. P. Security doesn’t work in the the industry, and largely speaks from a position of willful ignorance about these issues.

                                                                      1. 0

                                                                        In Italy, you are allowed to have those debates because the stakes are much lower

                                                                        I do not know United States enough for a comparison, but sadly we have poverty here too. Our livelihood is not based on social approval, but it’s often strongly based on social relationships.

                                                                        We just know we are all on the same boat.

                                                                        So I don’t know if we are free to talk because we have lower stakes, or we have lower stakes because we are free to talk.

                                                                        In any case, an international project should not be ruled according to the issues of a single country.

                                                                        1. 1

                                                                          In any case, an international project should not be ruled according to the issues of a single country.

                                                                          I don’t understand what this is in reference to, or what it could possibly mean in terms of what kind of governance structure or details. I was pointing out that there are cultural differences that make it easier or harder for people who are forced together to have disagreements about their values, or be able to set aside those differences in order to do something together.

                                                                  2. 10

                                                                    The CoC is about civility, not politics. And I can’t believe you don’t know that. So what is your purpose? Are you standing up for the right to humiliate people or be rude to them? That’s a principle for you?

                                                                    1. 0

                                                                      Just decent managers or owners that respond to employee complaints…

                                                                      Poor employees, at the mercy of their benevolent dictators.

                                                                  3. 3

                                                                    Wait, you believe without a CoC, owners of a project have less power? An owner of a project already has views of what kind of behavior they think is good and what they think is bad. If they don’t write it down in CoC, you are still at their mercy, but now you have to guess what the hell they are thinking.

                                                                    I’m not sure how a CoC increases any power they already have. You still don’t have moral agency because we live in a society where there are owners and non-owners. There is still a power differential. If you want democratic rule, then you need to fight against ownership by paper.

                                                                    1. 2

                                                                      Even without a CoC the project owners selectively enforce hidden rules. I’m not sure how making the rules hidden is better than making them explicit.

                                                                  1. 27

                                                                    Agreed wholeheartedly with everything on this list (esp. Docker and Nix) except for the Code of Conduct line. Sadly, we’re living in a time where assholes need to be explicitly uninvited.

                                                                    1. 15

                                                                      I don’t share the concept of gender with the FreeBSD CoC. When growing up, i observed the world with my own eyes, and found that its an rather arbitrary abstraction not providing value. Should others be allowed to force me to use that concept against my conscience? I’m not rude or disrespectful towards peers (inc. actual transgender persons) because of that.

                                                                      Does that make me an asshole that needs to be explicitly uninvited?

                                                                      1. 20

                                                                        If you do the things that the FreeBSD CoC says you shouldn’t do (calling people by names they’ve explicitly said shouldn’t be used especially) then yes. Otherwise I don’t really see how it affects you?

                                                                        1. 10

                                                                          Having control over the abstractions people use also limits what those people can express. Achilles and the Tortoise is a good illustration of that.

                                                                          Forcing these abstractions over people is what violates their autonomy, which is why the FreeBSD CoC was so controversial in the first place. Its that the proponents argue that you have nothing to fear if you are “a good person”, equating lawfulness with being a good person. Which is fundamentally wrong. Yes, Edward Snowden violated laws, but i doubt he is a bad person because of that.

                                                                          1. 11

                                                                            Can you be more practical, less philosophical, and provide an example of something you’d say, that the CoC would consider wrong? (No bad intentions or hidden agenda in this question, just generally wondering how a real life example of the issue looks like for you).

                                                                            1. 12

                                                                              “/me hugs nullp0tr

                                                                              “You shouldn’t beat your children tho”

                                                                              “I dislike that you program killer robots for the CIA”

                                                                              1. 6

                                                                                Thanks for the examples. I understand your frustration with it a bit more now. How would you deal with someone who’s constantly hugging or backrubbing someone else after being asked to stop? and how does your view on gender affect your empathy towards people with a different view and who get offended by someone who’s constantly using the wrong pronoun?

                                                                                1. 11

                                                                                  Constantly harassing another user will get you warned, kicked or even banned with our without a CoC. Worst case (if the channel moderation doesn’t care) is that you need to block/set them on your ignore list.

                                                                                  I don’t have an generic attitude on that, and i didn’t have IRL conflicts on pronouns yet. The transgender persons i interacted with were respectable persons and individually got me to use their preferred pronoun without force.

                                                                                  Conflict is a component of daily life. Persons who handle conflict by getting offended and expecting others to change their mind are akin to the kid in the mall throwing a tantrum because mom wont buy the gummy bears. That’s just shitty diplomacy and wont get you anywhere. Embodying such an attitude into an community law will make your community a toxic place.

                                                                                  1. 6

                                                                                    I don’t have an generic attitude on that, and i didn’t have IRL conflicts on pronouns yet. The transgender persons i interacted with were respectable persons and individually got me to use their preferred pronoun without force.

                                                                                    So is it okay in your opinion to intentionally use the wrong pronoun if the persons in question were not respectable?

                                                                                    Constantly harassing another user will get you warned, kicked or even banned with our without a CoC. Worst case (if the channel moderation doesn’t care) is that you need to block/set them on your ignore list.

                                                                                    What’s the difference between having a written rule about what would get you banned and not having one?

                                                                                    Conflict is a component of daily life. Persons who handle conflict by getting offended and expecting others to change their mind are akin to the kid in the mall throwing a tantrum because mom wont buy the gummy bears. That’s just shitty diplomacy and wont get you anywhere. Embodying such an attitude into an community law will make your community a toxic place.

                                                                                    How would you handle conflicts created by racism, sexism, etc in a non toxic way?

                                                                                    1. 9

                                                                                      So is it okay in your opinion to intentionally use the wrong pronoun if the persons in question were not respectable?

                                                                                      If people start interacting with me by insulting me, then i definitely wont let them tell me how to call them.

                                                                                      What’s the difference between having a written rule about what would get you banned and not having one?

                                                                                      Power. Rulemakers wield extraordinary power because they are the ones who interpret a situation as lawful or unlawful. Not getting in trouble with the law is, to an extent, doing good diplomacy with the rulemakers.

                                                                                      How would you handle conflicts created by racism, sexism, etc in a non toxic way? Ideally:

                                                                                      • Tell that i did not find it appropriate, explain why
                                                                                      • Optional discussion, quite often its just an misunderstanding
                                                                                      • Avoid being antagonistic, not calling them sexist or insults (burns bridges instantly)

                                                                                      Best case is that i can base my standpoint upon their values. Using authoritative power to deploy sanctions should always be the last resort.

                                                                                      1. 3

                                                                                        If people start interacting with me by insulting me

                                                                                        What are the ways you get insulted? What if someone does it by accident?

                                                                                        If people start interacting with me by insulting me, then i definitely wont let them tell me how to call them.

                                                                                        Didn’t you just say being diplomatic is key?

                                                                                        Persons who handle conflict by getting offended…

                                                                                        I’m confused why you would revert to being a kid in the mall by not calling someone by their preferred pronoun if they insulted you. I agree with your overall idea of being diplomatic.

                                                                                        1. 2

                                                                                          Thanks for taking the time to clarify your stand.

                                                                                          It seems you’d rather have an environment of mutual respect and no single/few figures that can decide on what constitutes as wrong doing selectively, and you’d rather solve the issues the FreeBSD CoC tries to address through diplomacy and listening to all parties?

                                                                                          How would you go about implementing your ideal conflict resolution approach in real communities? (alternatively, do you have an example of a community that already does that or something similar?)

                                                                                          1. 4

                                                                                            My preference aren’t as exotic at it seems on the first view.

                                                                                            I dont need to implement it on my own, its already live in such an community, an local instance of the Chaos Computer Club in germany. Hacker culture tends to be decentral and skeptical of authorities in general, probably because hackers tend to be persons that value personal autonomy high. Socially adjacent communities (alot of artists here!) and companies share alot of the mindset.

                                                                                            Edit: These communities are also the ones where most positive feedback about my CoC-critical stuff comes from. I think i hit a nerve there that already bothered quite some people

                                                                                2. 7

                                                                                  “I think that the memo that James Damore wrote about gender diversity efforts at Google was by and large correct and that Google was wrong to fire him. He should be considered welcome to contribute in good standing to this open-source software project if he so chooses.”

                                                                                  Any code of conduct that allowed me to say that sentence is (probably) fine; any code of conduct that treated me saying that sentence as a violation is not fine.

                                                                                  1. 5

                                                                                    That is a surprisingly good litmus test. Regardless of your actual view on the Damore memo or subsequent furore, a CoC that can penalize you for expressing your view about a person or situation like that is probably overstepping the mark.

                                                                                    It’s not whether someone would agree with you that he should be welcome to contribute to a project, it’s whether you are allowed to say it. In that regard I really like it as an overreach test.

                                                                                    1. 4

                                                                                      I’ve read the whole memo. I think he gets some things wrong and disagree with him here and there, but I’m glad I read it. Overall he does have a lot of good points, and it does show a big problem with the “leftness” of silicon valley tech culture.

                                                                                      Instead of trying to get more women in STEM/tech, how about we make it more socially acceptable for everyone, both men and women, to go after things they actually like to do. How many people do you know in tech, both men and women, hate their cubeville life. So many people I know, no matter how enthusiastic they might seem at times, deep down, do not like their jobs. We’ve got Dilbert, Office Space, We the Robots and so many other things in entertainment that show how awful these jobs can be. People want to escape.

                                                                                      I feel like there is a lot of pressure on men (and I guess now more on women) to earn enough to provide for a family. We mock people with English or Philosophy degrees with their steamy piles of debt; debt the previous generation would not have had because they could pay for school by working at a grocery store. The cost of education is too high and it’s being turned into a pipeline to the industry that is in demand. The debt locks people in.

                                                                                      Want to solve income inequality? Make everyone’s income public. Every employee knows what every other employee makes and that should be a Federal mandate. Why the fuck is there a taboo over income anyway. If you know what people are worth, you know what you should be wroth. I have a hypothesis that if you could somehow measure confidence, people’s incomes would directly correlate with their confidence level and not their genders.

                                                                                      I think people are locked into a certain political ideology and the false left/right paradigm that they fail to see the real issues are not the issues they’re addressing. Those are symptoms of a much deeper cause.

                                                                                      1. 4

                                                                                        I honestly haven’t read the memo. Is it something specific in the memo that you wanna be able to express your agreement with? or do you want to be able to express any opinion regardless of what it entails?

                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                          I’m still overall confused by James Damore’s memo. It was mostly an incoherent mess when I read it. What part was he right about in regards to Google’s gender diversity efforts?

                                                                                      2. 3

                                                                                        Ok. What do you do that violates the CoC that isn’t bad? So far all I’ve heard is weird analogies that don’t really make sense. Can you articulate your concrete concerns?

                                                                                        1. 9

                                                                                          Not fighting for moral autonomy because you agree with it is analogous to not fighting for free speech because you agree with what the state says.

                                                                                          I do enjoy my moral autonomy, i exercise it, and i expect other people to let me do it. And the FreeBSD CoC says, “not here”. So i avoid FreeBSD.

                                                                                          Like free speech, moral autonomy is an essential part of democratic society (Lawrence Kohlberg: “Moral Development”), even if not everyone needs it.

                                                                                          1. 7

                                                                                            Not fighting for moral autonomy because you agree with it is analogous to not fighting for free speech because you agree with what the state says.

                                                                                            This is entirely disingenuous. FreeBSD is not the state, and requiring that contributors to an open source project not express violent prejudice against other contributors in order to be allowed to contribute is not at all similar to state censorship.

                                                                                            I do enjoy my moral autonomy, i exercise it, and i expect other people to let me do it.

                                                                                            Thanks for clarifying. You should realize that this is literally the purpose of CoCs like this one. You value your ability to do whatever you like over the productivity and comfort of others, and that’s not the attitude FreeBSD, Rust etc want in their community, because it tends to decrease productivity and cause burnout, not to mention just being a pain in the ass to work with.

                                                                                            So, yes, I agree with the others in this thread. Please continue to avoid FreeBSD, and if possible, me as well.

                                                                                            1. 3

                                                                                              FreeBSD is not the state, and requiring that contributors to an open source project not express violent prejudice against other contributors in order to be allowed to contribute is not at all similar to state censorship.

                                                                                              Would you not avoid a project that required you to limit your freedom of speech simply on principle? Or, if you would not, do you at least understand why someone else might on principle?

                                                                                              The only difference in this example is that you at least have a reasonable choice of simply not using/contributing to FreeBSD if you disagree.

                                                                                              1. 5

                                                                                                Would you not avoid a project that required you to limit your freedom of speech simply on principle?

                                                                                                Assuming you don’t mean “freedom of speech” (as in, freedom from state censorship) and actually mean “freedom to say whatever you want, whenever you want, in whatever forum you want”, this question is so broad as to be meaningless. If you DO mean “freedom of speech”, then it is so narrow as to be irrelevant, since the policies of open source projects don’t affect your legal freedom of speech. In either case, you miss the point.

                                                                                                Community standards exist in order to prevent, in specific spaces, behavior that will adversely affect the community that creates them. All communities have standards. Codes of Conduct formalize and write down those standards, and allow people to examine them. If a community with standards by which one did not wish to abide existed and was otherwise appealing, one might join it and be unpleasantly surprised. On the other hand, a CoC allows one to see, up front, the norms and standards of a community. This is good.

                                                                                                Therefore, it seems like @liwakura doesn’t disagree so much with the existence of a CoC as with the community standards many of them encode - in particular, those of the Node.js and FreeBSD communities. Now comes the critical point:

                                                                                                Rather than engage with specific problems in the CoC (e.g., “[specific rule] is open to serious abuse and provides little protection for the accused”, et cetera), liwakura focused on the “restriction of autonomy”. Yes, community standards restrict autonomy. That is the point. They prevent behavior such as the purposeful, spiteful misgendering liwakura described as a likely outcome with a negative interaction with a trans person, or purposeful ignorance (as in, the noun form of “to ignore”, not as in lack of knowledge) of social structure of gender- and sex-based oppression. By preventing those behaviors from being displayed by liwakura in FreeBSD spaces, the CoC has succeeded.

                                                                                                In other words, the CoC says “If you’re going to be a jerk, such as in these specific ways, stay out”, and liwakura’s response was “How dare you tell me that you don’t want me to be a jerk in these specific ways! I’m going to do what you say and not participate in your community, but also whine about it on the Internet.”

                                                                                                1. 2

                                                                                                  Community standards exist in order to prevent, in specific spaces, behavior that will adversely affect the community that creates them.

                                                                                                  From what I’ve seen, the CoC being enforced in these specific spaces does not usually happen - they are enforced outside of those spaces as well. If I say some homophobic stuff on IRC, and it gets screencapped and posted on Twitter, do I get kicked out as a member of Project XYZ that uses a CoC which specifically prohibits that sort of language? Obviously I’ve said it, and there is public record of it - but I wasn’t saying it in context of the project, or to any member of the project, and in a (relatively) private setting. If I’m punished for something like that, then I’ve lost moral autonomy outside of the project.

                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                    I would consider that to be a very arguable case. Is it possible that one’s external behavior will negatively impact the project and its community? Yes. Is your objection about moral autonomy outside the project valid? Also yes.

                                                                                        2. 0

                                                                                          Ok. What do you do that violates the CoC that isn’t bad? So far all I’ve heard is weird analogies that don’t really make sense. Can you articulate your concrete concerns?

                                                                                    2. 2

                                                                                      To be fair, I fall between the OP and the parent. Aside from one pre-COC level FreeNAS, I don’t use FreeBSD (which is the example) because of the shitty CoC. I’m not opposed to a well-structured one, but FreeBSD doesn’t appear to have one. Using a product means you condone the producer’s practices. I don’t use Facebook. I’m slowly degoogling my life, and I’m getting rid of Linux. Amazon Prime will be a hard plaster to pull off, but I’m working up to that. I see FreeBSD the same way - I don’t support their CoC implementation, ergo I won’t support the product by using it.

                                                                                      The very fact that any online discussion quickly devolves into poisonous ad-hominem is reason enough for me to be put off by the presence of one, but they can serve a purpose when well implemented (if GNU had a well-designed CoC then the recent Glibc abort() debacle could’ve been handled through it for example). When they’re poorly implemented like with FreeBSD, it’s not properly serving it’s existing community.

                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                        Why are you getting rid of linux?

                                                                                        1. 5

                                                                                          It’s a combination of factors, some of which are due to shitshows like systemd, issues with breaking compatibility (e.g. ifconfig) and the realisation after moving to docker that for the most part, I have absolutely no idea what code is running on these systems.

                                                                                          I wrote about this in another comment here: https://lobste.rs/s/yxswhm/what_are_you_self_hosting#c_8reclz

                                                                                          To be fair, a lot of this is a result of my own poor personal choices, but I now feel like I’m fighting Linux to make it do what I want predictably, and not do things I didn’t tell it to do. It’s very reminiscent of MacOS’s shift a few years back.

                                                                                          I’m going to spend some time with Alpine simply because that’s what a lot of my docker containers for public systems run on, but I’m not building new systems to run docker, no longer buying raspberry pis (thanks, binary blobs) and instead of migrating to Linux, I’m migrating a lot of systems to Open and NetBSD. I would’ve chosen FreeBSD, but the CoC debacles mean I’m less comfortable supporting it. My next NAS build may well run Illumos instead.

                                                                                    1. 3

                                                                                      We released Merit about a week and a half ago. I’m working on integrating our newly released pool miner into Merit Core

                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                        Came here to see what software people use. I literally remember all of them. I’m not even joking. Is that stupid? Because it seems password managers only protect you against large sweeping attacks. But seem to have no benefit for targeted attacks.

                                                                                        1. 75

                                                                                          Capitalism is killing us in a very literal sense by destroying our habitat at an ever accelerating rate. The fundamental idea of needing growth and having to constantly invent new things to peddle leads to ever more disposable products, that are replaced for the sake of being replaced. There’s been very little actual innovation happening in the phone space. The vendors are intentionally building devices using the planned obsolescence model to force the upgrade cycle.

                                                                                          The cancer of consumerism affects pretty much every aspect of society, we’ve clear cut unique rain forests and destroyed millions of species we haven’t even documented so that we can make palm oil. A product that causes cancer, but that’s fractionally cheaper than other kinds of oil. We’ve created a garbage patch the size of a continent in the ocean. We’re poisoning the land with fracking. The list is endless, and it all comes down to the American ethos that making money is a sacred right that trumps all other concerns.

                                                                                          1. 22

                                                                                            Capitalism is killing us in a very literal sense by destroying our habitat at an ever accelerating rate.

                                                                                            The cancer of consumerism affects pretty much every aspect of society, we’ve clear cut unique rain forests and destroyed millions of species we haven’t even documented so that we can make palm oil.

                                                                                            One can get into a big debate about this, but the concept of externalities has existed for a long time and specifically addresses these concerns. Products do not cost what they should when taken their less tangible environment impact into account. It’s somewhat up to the reader to decide if the inability of society to take those into account is capitalism’s fault, or just human nature, or something else. I live in a country that leans much more socialist than the US but is unequivocally a capitalist country and they do a better job of managing these externalities. And China is not really capitalistic in the same way the US is but is a pretty significant polluter.

                                                                                            1. 5

                                                                                              Indeed, it’s not the fault of the economic system (if you think Capitalistic societies are wasteful, take a look at the waste and inefficiency of industry under the USSR). If externalities are correctly accounted for, or to be safe, even over-accounted for by means of taxation or otherwise, the market will work itself out. If the environmental cost means the new iPhone costs $2000 in real costs, Apple will work to reduce environmental cost in order to make an affordable phone again and everyone wins. And if they don’t, another company will figure it out instead and Apple will lose.

                                                                                              Currently, there is basically no accounting for these externalities, and in some cases (although afaik not related to smart phones), there are subsidies and price-ceiling regulations and subsidies that actually decreases the cost of some externalities artificially and are worse for the environment than no government intervention at all.

                                                                                              The easy example of this is California State water subsidies for farmers. Artificially cheap water for farmers means they grow water-guzzling crops that are not otherwise efficient to grow in arid parts of the state, and cause environmental damage and water shortage to normal consumers. Can you imagine your local government asking you to take shorter showers and not wash your car, when farmers are paying 94% less than you to grow crops that could much more efficiently be grown in other parts of the country? That’s what happens in California.

                                                                                              Step 1 and 2 are to get rid of the current subsidies and regulations that aggravate externalities and impose new regulation/taxes that help account for externalities.

                                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                                I have talked to a factory owner in china. He said China is more capitalist than the USA. He said China prioritizes capital over social concerns.

                                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                                  Ok? I can talk to lots of people with lots of opinions. That doesn’t make it true.

                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                    It’s just impressive that a capitalist would say. If China was even remotely communist, don’t you find it interesting that most capitalists who made deals with China seem ok helping ‘the enemy’ become the second largest economy in the world? I prefer to believe the simpler possibility that China is pretty darn capitalist itself.

                                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                                      I did not say China was not capitalist, I said it’s not in the same way as the US. There is a lot more state involvement in China.

                                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                                        Is your claim then that state involvement means you have more pollution? Maybe I’m confused by what you were trying to get at, sorry :-/

                                                                                                        1. 2

                                                                                                          No, I was pointing out that different countries are doing capitalism differently and some of them are better at dealing with externalities and some of them are worse. With the overall point being that capitalism might be the wrong scapegoat.

                                                                                                1. 7

                                                                                                  I think the consumer could be blamed more than capitalism, the companies make what sells, the consumers are individuals who buy products that hurt the environment, I think that it is changing though as people become more aware of these issues, they buy more environmentally friendly products.

                                                                                                  1. 30

                                                                                                    You’re blaming the consumer? I’d really recommend watching Century of the Self. Advertising has a massive impact and the mass of humans are being fed this desire for all the things we consume.

                                                                                                    I mean, this really delves into the deeper question of self-awareness, agency and free will, but I really don’t think most human beings are even remotely aware.

                                                                                                    Engineers, people on Lobster, et. al do really want standard devices. Fuck ARM. Give me a god damn mobile platform. Microsoft for the love of god, just publish your unlock key for your dead phone line so we can have at least one line of devices with UEFI+ARM. Device tree can go die in a fire.

                                                                                                    The Linux-style revolution of the 2000s (among developers) isn’t happening on mobile because every device is just too damn different. The average consumer could care less. Most people like to buy new things, and we’re been indoctrinated to that point. Retailers and manufactures have focus groups geared right at delivering the dopamine rush.

                                                                                                    I personally hate buying things. When my mobile stopped charging yesterday and the back broke again, I thought about changing it out. I’ve replaced the back twice already and the camera has spots on the sensor under the lenses.

                                                                                                    I was able to get it charging when I got home on a high amp USB port, so instead I just ordered yet another back and a new camera (I thought it’d be a bitch to get out, but a few YouTube videos show I was looking at the ribbon wrong and it’s actually pretty easy to replace).

                                                                                                    I feel bad when I buy things, but it took a lot of work to get to that point. I’ve sold or given away most of my things multiple times to go backpacking, I run ad block .. I mean if everyone did what I’d did, my life wouldn’t be sustainable. :-P

                                                                                                    We are in a really solidly locked paradigm and I don’t think it can simply shift. If you believe the authors of The Dictators Handbook, we literally have to run our of resources before the general public and really push for dramatically different changes.

                                                                                                    We really need more commitment to open standards mobile devices. The Ubuntu Edge could have been a game changer, or even the Fairphone. The Edge never got funded and the Fairphone can’t even keep parts sourced for their older models.

                                                                                                    We need a combination of people’s attitudes + engineers working on OSS alternatives, and I don’t see either happening any time soon.

                                                                                                    Edit: I forgot to mention, Postmarket OS is making huge strides into making older cellphones useful and I hope we see more of that too.

                                                                                                    1. 7

                                                                                                      I second the recommendation for The Century of the Self. That movie offers a life-changing change of perspective. The other documentaries by Curtis are also great and well worth the time.

                                                                                                      1. 3

                                                                                                        Century of the Self was a real eye opener. Curtis’s latest documentary, HyperNormalisation, also offers very interesting perspectives.

                                                                                                      2. 26

                                                                                                        Capitalism, by it’s very nature, drives companies to not be satisfied with what already sells. Companies are constantly looking to create new markets and products, and that includes creating demand.

                                                                                                        IOW, consumers aren’t fixed actors who buy what they need; they are acted upon to create an ever increasing number of needs.

                                                                                                        There are too many examples of this dynamic to bother listing.

                                                                                                        1. 12

                                                                                                          It’s also very difficult for the consumer to tell exactly how destructive a particular product is. The only price we pay is the sticker price. Unless you really want to put a lot of time into research it is hard to tell which product is better for the environment.

                                                                                                          1. 14

                                                                                                            It’s ridiculous to expect everyone to be an expert on every supply chain in the world, starting right from the mines and energy production all the way to the store shelf. That’s effectively what you are requiring.

                                                                                                            I’m saying this as a very conscious consumer. I care about my carbon footprint, I don’t buy palm oil, I limit plastic consumption, I limit my consumption overall, but it’s all a drop in the ocean and changes nothing. There are still hundreds of compounds in the everyday items I buy whose provenance I know nothing about and which could be even more destructive. Not to mention that manufacturers really don’t want you to know, it’s simply not in their interest.

                                                                                                            You’re creating an impossible task and setting people up to fail. It is not the answer.

                                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                                              “It’s ridiculous to expect everyone to be an expert on every supply chain in the world, starting right from the mines and energy production all the way to the store shelf. That’s effectively what you are requiring.”

                                                                                                              I don’t think it is what they’re requiring and it’s much easier than you describe. Here’s a few options:

                                                                                                              1. People who are really concerned about this at a level demanding much sacrifice to avoid damaging the environment should automatically avoid buying anything they can’t provably trust by default. The Amish are a decent example that avoids a lot of modern stuff due to commitment to beliefs.

                                                                                                              2. There’s groups that try to keep track of corporate abuse, environmental actions, and so on of various companies. They maintain good and bad lists. More people that supposedly care can both use them and join them in maintaining that data. It would be split among many people to lessen each’s burden. Again, avoid things by default until they get on the good lists. Ditch them if they get on the bad ones.

                                                                                                              3. Collectively push their politicians for laws giving proper labels, auditing, etc that help with No 2. Also, push for externalities to be charged back to the companies somehow to incentivize less-damaging behavior.

                                                                                                              4. Start their own businesses that practice what they preach. Build the principles into their charters, contracts, and so on. Niche businesses doing a better job create more options on the good lists in No 2. There’s entrepreneurs doing this.

                                                                                                              So, not all-knowing consumers as you indicated. Quite a few strategies that are less impossible.

                                                                                                              1. 4

                                                                                                                @ac specifically suggested consumer choice as the solution to environmental issues, and that’s what I disagreed with.

                                                                                                                Your point number 3 is quite different from the other three, and it’s what I would suggest as a far more effective strategy than consumer choice (along with putting pressure on various corporations). As an aside, I still wouldn’t call it easy - it’s always a hard slog.

                                                                                                                Your points 1, 2 and 4 still rely on consumer choice, and effectively boil down to: either remove yourself from modern civilisation, or understand every supply chain in the world. I think it’s obvious that the first choice is neither desirable nor “much easier” for the vast majority of people (and I don’t think it’s the best possible solution). The second is impossible, as I said before.

                                                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                                                  “consumer choice as the solution to environmental issues”

                                                                                                                  edit to add: consumer choice eliminated entire industries worth of companies because they wanted something else. It’s only worsened environmental issues. That’s probably not an argument against consumer choice so much as in favor of them willing to sacrifice the environment overall to get the immediate things they want.

                                                                                                                  “either remove yourself from modern civilisation, or understand every supply chain in the world”

                                                                                                                  This is another false dichotomy. I know lots of people who are highly-connected with other people but don’t own lots of tech or follow lots of fads. In many cases, they seem to know about them enough to have good conversations with people. They follow what’s going on or are just good listeners. Buying tons of gadgets or harmful things isn’t necessary for participation. You can get buy with a lot less than average middle or upper class person.

                                                                                                                  What you said is better understood as a spectrum to be in like most things. Lots of positions in it.

                                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                                    I think we might actually be mostly in agreement, but we’re talking past each other a bit.

                                                                                                                    That’s probably not an argument against consumer choice so much as in favor of them willing to sacrifice the environment overall to get the immediate things they want.

                                                                                                                    I agree with this. But even when consumer choice is applied with environmental goals in mind, I believe its effect is very limited, simply because most people won’t participate.

                                                                                                                    This is another false dichotomy.

                                                                                                                    Yeah, but it was derived from your points :) I was just trying to hammer the point that consumer choice isn’t an effective solution.

                                                                                                                    You can get buy with a lot less than average middle or upper class person.

                                                                                                                    Totally. I’ve been doing that for a long time: avoiding gadgets and keeping the stuff I need (eg a laptop) as long as I can.

                                                                                                                    1. 1

                                                                                                                      “But even when consumer choice is applied with environmental goals in mind, I believe its effect is very limited, simply because most people won’t participate.”

                                                                                                                      Oh OK. Yeah, I share that depressing view. Evidence is overwhelmingly in our favor on it. It’s even made me wonder if I should even be doing the things I’m doing if so few are doing their part.

                                                                                                            2. 5

                                                                                                              The blame rests on the producers, not on the consumers.

                                                                                                              Consumers are only able to select off of the menu of available products, so to speak. Most of the choices everyday consumers face are dictated by their employers and whatever is currently available to make it through their day.

                                                                                                              No person can reasonably trace the entire supply chain for every item they purchase, and could likely be impossible even with generous time windows. Nor would I want every single consumer to spend their non-working time to tracing these chains.

                                                                                                              Additionally, shifting this blame to the consumer creates conditions where producers can charge a premium on ‘green’ and ‘sustainable’ products. Only consumers with the means to consume ‘ethically’ are able to do so, and thus shame people with less money for being the problem.

                                                                                                              The blame falls squarely on the entities producing these products and the states tasked with regulating production. There will be no market-based solution to get us out of the climate catastrophe, and we certainly can’t vote for a green future with our dollars.

                                                                                                              1. 4

                                                                                                                Consumers are only able to select off of the menu of available products, so to speak. Most of the choices everyday consumers face are dictated by their employers and whatever is currently available to make it through their day.

                                                                                                                That’s not true even though it seems it is. The consumers’ past behavior and present statements play a major role in what suppliers will produce. Most of what you see today didn’t happen overnight. There were battles fought where quite a few companies were out there doing more ethical things on supply side. They ended up bankrupt or with less marketshare while the unethical companies got way ahead through better marketing of their products. With enough wealth accumulated, they continued buying the brands of the better companies remaking them into scumbag companies, too, in many cases.

                                                                                                                For instance, I strongly advise against companies developing privacy- or security-oriented versions of software products that actually mitigate risks. They’ll go bankrupt like such companies often always did. The companies that actually make lots of money apply the buzzwords customers are looking for, integrate into their existing tooling (often insecure), have features they demand that are too complex to secure, and in some cases are so cheap the QA couldn’t have possibly been done right. That has to be private or secure for real against smart black hats. Not going to happen most of the time.

                                                                                                                So, I instead tell people to bake cost-effective security enhancements and good service into an otherwise good product advertised for mostly non-security benefits. Why? Because that’s what demand-side responds to almost every time. So, the supply must provide it if hoping to make waves. Turns out, there’s also an upper limit to what one can achieve in that way, too. The crowds’ demands will keep creating obstacles to reliability, security, workers’ quality of life, supplier choice, environment… you name it. They mostly don’t care either where suppliers being honest about costs will be abandoned for those delivering to demand side. In face of that, most suppliers will focus on what they think is in demand across as many proven dimensions as possible.

                                                                                                                Demand and supply side are both guilty here in a way that’s closely intertwined. It’s mostly demand side, though, as quite a few suppliers in each segment will give them whatever they’re willing to pay for at a profit.

                                                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                                                  I agree with a lot of your above point, but want to unpack some of this.

                                                                                                                  Software security is a strange case to turn to since it has less direct implications on the climate crisis (sure anything that relies on a datacenter is probably using too much energy) compared to the production of disposable, resource-intensive goods.

                                                                                                                  Demand and supply side are both guilty here in a way that’s closely intertwined. It’s mostly demand side, though, as quite a few suppliers in each segment will give them whatever they’re willing to pay for at a profit.

                                                                                                                  I parse this paragraph to read: we should blame consumers for buying what’s available and affordable, because suppliers are incapable of acting ethically (due to competition).

                                                                                                                  So should we blame the end consumer for buying a phone every two years and not the phone manufacturers/retailers for creating rackets of planned obsolescence?

                                                                                                                  And additionally, most suppliers are consumers of something else upstream. Virtually everything that reaches an end consumer has been consumed and processed several times over by suppliers above. The suppliers are guilty on both counts by our separate reasoning.

                                                                                                                  Blaming individuals for structural problems simply lets suppliers shirk any responsibility they should have to society. After all, suppliers have no responsibility other than to create profits. Suppliers’ bad behavior must be curtailed either through regulation, public education campaigns to affect consumption habits, or organizing within workplaces.

                                                                                                                  (As an aside, I appreciate your response and it’s both useful and stimulating to hear your points)

                                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                                    “I parse this paragraph to read: we should blame consumers for buying what’s available and affordable, because suppliers are incapable of acting ethically (due to competition).”

                                                                                                                    You added two words, available and affordable, to what I said. I left affordable off because many products that are more ethical are still affordable. Most don’t buy them anyway. I left availability off since there’s products appearing all the time in this space that mostly get ignored. The demand side not buying enough of what was and currently is available in a segment sends a message to suppliers about what they should produce. Especially if it’s consistent. Under vote with your wallet, we should give consumers their share of credit or blame for anything their purchasing decisions as a whole are supporting or destroying. That most won’t deliberately try to obtain an ethical supplier of… anything… supports my notion demand side has a lot to do with unethical activities of financially-successful suppliers.

                                                                                                                    For a quick example, there are often coops and farmers markets in lots of rural areas or suburban towns in them. There’s usually a segment of people who buy from them to support their style of operation and/or jobs. There’s usually enough to keep them in business. You might count Costco in that, too, where a membership fee that’s fixed cost gets the customers a pile of stuff at a promised low-markup and great service. There’s people that use credit unions, esp in their industry, instead of banks. There’s people that try to buy from nonprofits, public beneit companies, companies with good track record, and so on. There’s both a demand side (tiny) and suppliers responding to it that show this could become a widespread thing.

                                                                                                                    Most consumers on demand side don’t do that stuff, though. They buy a mix of necessities and arbitrary stuff from whatever supplier is lowest cost, cheapest, most variety, promoting certain image, or other arbitrary reasons. They do this so much that most suppliers, esp market leaders, optimize their marketing for that stuff. They also make more money off these people that let them put lots of ethical, niche players out of business over time. So, yeah, I’d say consumer demand being apathetic to ethics or long-term thinking is a huge part of the problem given it puts tens of billions into hands of unethical parties. Then, some of that money goes into politicians’ campaign funds so they make things even more difficult for those companies’ opponents.

                                                                                                                    “Blaming individuals for structural problems simply lets suppliers shirk any responsibility they should have to society.”

                                                                                                                    Or the individuals can buy from different suppliers highlighting why they’re doing it. Other individuals can start companies responding to that massive stated demand. The existing vendors will pivot their operations. Things start shifting. It won’t happen without people willing to buy it. Alternatively, using regulation as you mentioned. I don’t know how well public education can help vs all the money put into advertising. The latter seems more powerful.

                                                                                                                    “(As an aside, I appreciate your response and it’s both useful and stimulating to hear your points)”

                                                                                                                    Thanks. Appreciate you challenging it so I think harder on and improve it. :)

                                                                                                                2. 2

                                                                                                                  Only consumers with the means to consume ‘ethically’ are able to do so, and thus shame people with less money for being the problem.

                                                                                                                  This is ignoring reality, removing cheaper options does not make the other options cheaper to manufacture. It is not shaming people.

                                                                                                                  You are also ignoring the fact that in a free country the consumers and producers are the same people. A dissatisfied consumer can become a producer of a new alternative if they see it as possible.

                                                                                                                3. 3

                                                                                                                  Exactly. The consumers could be doing more on issues like this. They’re complicit or actively contribute to the problems.

                                                                                                                  For example, I use old devices for as long as I can on purpose to reduce waste. I try to also buy things that last as long as possible. That’s a bit harder in some markets than others. For appliances, I just buy things that are 20 years old. They do the job and usually last 10 more years since planned obsolescence had fewer tricks at the time. ;) My smartphone is finally getting unreliable on essential functions, though. Bout to replace it. I’ll donate, reuse, or recycle it when I get new one.

                                                                                                                  On PC side, I’m using a backup whose age I can’t recall with a Celeron after my Ubuntu Dell w/ Core Duo 2 died. It was eight years old. Attempting to revive it soon in case it’s just HD or something simple. It’s acting weird, though, so might just become a box for VM experiments, fuzzing, opening highly-untrustworthy URLs or files, etc. :)

                                                                                                                4. 7

                                                                                                                  Capitalism is killing us in a very literal sense by destroying our habitat at an ever accelerating rate

                                                                                                                  Which alternatives would make people happier to consume less – drive older cars, wear rattier clothing, and demand fewer exotic vacations? Because, really, that’s the solution to excessive use of the environment: Be happier with less.

                                                                                                                  Unfortunately, greed has been a constant of human nature far too long for capitalism to take the blame there.

                                                                                                                  1. 9

                                                                                                                    Which alternatives would make people happier to consume less – drive older cars, wear rattier clothing, and demand fewer exotic vacations?

                                                                                                                    Why do people want new cars, the latest fashions, and exotic vacations in the first place? If it’s all about status and bragging rights, then it’s going to take a massive cultural shift that goes against at least two generation’s worth of cultural programming by advertisers on the behalf of the auto, fashion and travel industries.

                                                                                                                    I don’t think consumerism kicked into high gear until after the end of World War II when modern advertising and television became ubiquitous, so perhaps the answer is to paraphrase Shakespeare:

                                                                                                                    The first thing we do, let’s kill all the advertisers.

                                                                                                                    OK, maybe killing them (or encouraging them to off themselves in the tradition of Bill Hicks) is overkill. Regardless, we should consider the possibility that advertising is nothing but private sector psyops on behalf of corporations, and should not be protected as “free speech”.

                                                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                                                      If there was an advertising exception for free speech, people would use it as an unprincipled excuse to ban whatever speech they didn’t like, by convincing the authorities to classify it as a type of advertising. After all, most unpopular speech is trying to convince someone of something, right? That’s what advertising fundamentally is, right?

                                                                                                                      Remember that the thing that Oliver Wendell Holmes called “falsely shouting fire in a crowded theater” wasn’t actually shouting “fire” in an actual crowded theater - it was a metaphor he used to describe protesting the military draft.

                                                                                                                      1. 9

                                                                                                                        I agree: there shouldn’t be an advertising exception on free speech. However, the First Amendment should only apply to homo sapiens or to organisms we might eventually recognize as sufficiently human to possess human rights. Corporations are not people, and should not have rights.

                                                                                                                        They might have certain powers defined by law, but “freedom of speech” shouldn’t be one of them.

                                                                                                                    2. 3

                                                                                                                      IMO, Hedonistic adaptation is a problem and getting worse. I try to actively fight against it.

                                                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                                                        It would be a start if we designed cities with walking and public transportation in mind, not cars.

                                                                                                                        My neighborhood is old and walkable. I do shopping on foot (I have a bicycle but don’t bother with it). For school/work, take a single bus and a few minutes walking. Getting a car would be a hassle, I don’t have a place to park it, and I’d have to pay large annual fees for rare use.

                                                                                                                        Newer neighborhoods appear to be planned with the idea that you’ll need a car for every single task. “Residential part” with no shops at all, but lots of room for parking. A large grocery store with a parking lot. Even train stations with a large parking lot, but no safe path for pedestrians/cyclists from the nearby neighborhoods.

                                                                                                                      2. 4

                                                                                                                        The new features on phones are so fucking stupid as well. People are buying new phones to get animated emojis and more round corners. It’s made much worse with phone OEMs actively making old phones work worse by slowing them down.

                                                                                                                        1. 7

                                                                                                                          There has been no evidence to my knowledge that anyone is slowing old phones down. This continues to be an unfounded rumor

                                                                                                                          1. 2

                                                                                                                            There’s also several Lobsters that have said Android smartphones get slower over time at a much greater rate than iPhones. I know my Galaxy S4 did. This might be hardware, software bloat, or whatever. There’s phones it’s happening on and those it isn’t in a market where users definitely don’t want their phones slowing down. So, my theory on Android side is it’s a problem they’re ignoring on purpose or even contributing to due to incentives. They could be investing money into making the platform much more efficient across devices, removing bloat, etc. They ain’t gonna do that.

                                                                                                                            1. 3

                                                                                                                              Android smartphones get slower over time at a much greater rate than iPhones.

                                                                                                                              In my experience, this tends to be 3rd party apps that start at boot and run all the time. Factory reset fixes it. Android system updates also make phones faster most of the time.

                                                                                                                              1. 1

                                                                                                                                Hmm. I’ll try it since I just backed everything up.

                                                                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                                                                  I’m still using a Nexus 6 I got ~2.5 years ago. I keep my phone pretty light. No Facebook or games. Yet, my phone was getting very laggy. I wiped the cache (Settings -> Storage -> Cached data) and that seemed to help a bit, but overall, my phone was still laggy. It seemed to get really bad in my text messaging app (I use whatever the stock version is). I realized that I had amassed a lot of text messages over the years, which includes quite a lot of gifs. I decided to wipe my messages. I did that by installing “SMS Backup & Restore” and telling it to delete all of my text messages, since apparently the stock app doesn’t have a way to do this in bulk. It took at least an hour for the deletion to complete. Once it was done, my phone feels almost as good as new, which makes me really happy, because I really was not looking forward to shelling out $1K for a Pixel.

                                                                                                                                  My working theory is that there is some sub-optimal strategy in how text messages are cached. Since I switch in and out of the text messaging app very frequently, it wouldn’t surprise me if I was somehow frequently evicting things from memory and causing disk reads, which would explain why the lag impacted my entire phone and not just text messages. But, this is just speculation. And a factory reset would have accomplished the same thing (I think?), so it’s consistent with the “factory reset fixes things” theory too.

                                                                                                                                  My wife is still on a Nexus 5 (great phone) and she has a similar usage pattern as me. Our plan is to delete her text messages too and see if that helps things.

                                                                                                                                  Anyway… I realize this basically boils down to folk remedies at this point, but I’m just going through this process now, so it’s top of mind and figured I’d share.

                                                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                                                    I’ll be damned. I baked up and wiped the SMS, nothing else. The phone seems like it’s moving a lot snappier. Literally a second or two of delay off some things. Some things are still slow but maybe app just is. YouTube always has long loading time. The individual videos load faster now, though.

                                                                                                                                    Folk remedy is working. Appreciate the tip! :)

                                                                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                                                                      w00t! Also, it’s worth mentioning that I was experiencing much worse delay than a second or two. Google Nav would sometimes lock up for many seconds.

                                                                                                                                      1. 1

                                                                                                                                        Maps seems OK. I probably should’ve been straight-up timing this stuff for better quality of evidence. Regardless, it’s moving a lot faster. Yours did, too. Two, strong anecdotes so far on top of factory reset. Far as we know, even their speed gains might have come from SMS clearing mostly that the reset did. Or other stuff.

                                                                                                                                        So, I think I’m going to use it as is for a week or two to assess this change plus get a feel for a new baseline. Then, I’ll factory reset it, reinstall some apps from scratch, and see if that makes a difference.

                                                                                                                                        1. 2

                                                                                                                                          Awesome. Please report back. :-)

                                                                                                                                          1. 2

                                                                                                                                            I’ll try to remember to. I’m just still stunned it wasn’t 20 Chrome tabs or all the PDF’s I download during the day. Instead, text messages I wasn’t even using. Of all things that could drag a whole platform down…

                                                                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                                                                              Sms is stored on the SIM card, right? That’s probably not got ideal I/O characteristics…

                                                                                                                                              1. 1

                                                                                                                                                I thought the contacts were but messages were on phone. I’m not sure. The contacts being on there could have an effect. I’d have hoped they cached a copy of SIM contents onto in-phone memory. Yeah, SIM access could be involved.

                                                                                                                                    2. 2

                                                                                                                                      Now, that’s fascinating. I don’t go in and out of text a lot but do have a lot of text messages. Many have GIF’s. There’s also at least two other apps that accumulate a lot of stuff. I might try wiping them. Btw, folk remedies feel kind of justified when we’re facing a complex, black-box system with nothing else to go on. ;)

                                                                                                                              2. 2

                                                                                                                                Official from apple: https://www.apple.com/au/iphone-battery-and-performance/

                                                                                                                                They slow phones with older batteries but don’t show the user any indication that it can be fixed very cheaply by replacing the battery (Until after the recent outrage) and many of them will just buy a new phone and see it’s much faster.

                                                                                                                                1. 12

                                                                                                                                  Wow, so much to unpack here.

                                                                                                                                  You said they slow old phones down. That is patently false. New versions of iOS are not made to run slowly on older model hardware.

                                                                                                                                  Apple did not slow phones down with old batteries. They throttled the CPU of phones with failing batteries (even brand new ones!) to prevent the phone from crashing due to voltage drops. This ensured the phone was still functional even if you needed your phone in an emergency. Yes it was stupid there was no notification to the user. This is no longer relevant because they now provide notifications to the user. This behavior existed for a short period of time in the lifespan of the iPhone: less than 90 days between introduction of release with throttling and release with controls to disable and notifications to users.

                                                                                                                                  Please take your fake outrage somewhere else.

                                                                                                                                  1. 5

                                                                                                                                    Apple did not slow phones down with old batteries. They throttled the CPU of phones with failing batteries (even brand new ones!) to prevent the phone from crashing due to voltage drops.

                                                                                                                                    In theory this affects new phones as well, but we know that as batteries grow older, they break down, hold less charge, and have a harder time achieving their design voltage. So in practice, this safety mechanism for the most part slows down older phones.

                                                                                                                                    You claim @user545 is unfairly representing the facts by making Apple look like this is some evil ploy to increase turnover for their mobile phones.

                                                                                                                                    However, given the fact that in reality this does mostly make older phones seem slower, and the fact that they put this in without ever telling anyone outside Apple and not allowing the user to check their battery health and how it affected the performance of their device, I feel like it requires a lot more effort not to make it look like an intentional decision on their part.

                                                                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                                                                      Sure, but if you have an old phone with OK batteries, then their code did not slow it down. So I think it is still more correct to say they slowed down those with bad batteries than those that were old even if most of those with bad batteries were also bad which really depended on phone’s use.

                                                                                                                                      The difference is not just academic. For example I have “inherited” iPhone6 from my wife that still has a good battery after more than 2 years and performs fine.

                                                                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                                                                        the fact that they put this in without ever telling anyone outside Apple

                                                                                                                                        It was in the release notes of that iOS release…

                                                                                                                                        edit: additionally it was known during the beta period in December. This wasn’t a surprise.

                                                                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                                                                          Again, untrue. The 11.2 release notes make no mention of batteries, throttling, or power management. (This was the release where Apple extended the throttling to the 7 series of phones.) The 10.2.1 release notes, in their entirety, read thus:

                                                                                                                                          iOS 10.2.1 includes bug fixes and improves the security of your iPhone or iPad. It also improves power management during peak workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone.

                                                                                                                                          That does not tell a reader that long-term CPU throttling is taking place, that it’s restricted to older-model iPhones only, that it’s based on battery health and fixable with a new battery (not a new phone), etc. It provides no useful or actionable information whatsoever. It’s opaque and frankly deceptive.

                                                                                                                                          1. 0

                                                                                                                                            You’re right, because I was mistaken and the change was added in iOS 10.2.1, 1/23/2017

                                                                                                                                            https://support.apple.com/kb/DL1893?locale=en_US

                                                                                                                                            It also improves power management during peak workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone.

                                                                                                                                            A user on the day of release:

                                                                                                                                            Hopefully it fixes the random battery shutoff bug.

                                                                                                                                            src: https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/apple-releases-ios-10-2-1-with-bug-fixes-and-security-improvements.2028992/page-2#post-24225066

                                                                                                                                            additionally in a press release:

                                                                                                                                            In February 2017, we updated our iOS 10.2.1 Read Me notes to let customers know the update ‘improves power management during peak workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns.’ We also provided a statement to several press outlets and said that we were seeing positive results from the software update.

                                                                                                                                            Please stop trolling. It was absent from the release notes for a short period of time. It was fixing a known issue affecting users. Go away.

                                                                                                                                            1. 4

                                                                                                                                              Did you even read the comment you are responding to? I quoted the 10.2.1 release notes in full–the updated version–and linked them too. Your response is abusive and in bad faith, your accusations of trolling specious.

                                                                                                                                              1. [Comment removed by moderator pushcx: We've never had cause to write a rule about doxxing, but pulling someone's personal info into a discussion like this to discredit them is inappropriate.]

                                                                                                                                                1. 2

                                                                                                                                                  I don’t hate Apple. I’m not going to sell my phone because I like it. The battery is even still in good shape! I wish they’d been a little more honest about their CPU throttling. I don’t know why this provokes such rage from you. Did you go through all my old comments to try to figure out what kind of phone I have? Little creepy.

                                                                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                                                                    I’m not angry about anything here. It’s just silly that such false claims continue to be thrown around about old phones intentionally being throttled to sell new phones. Apple hasn’t done that. Maybe someone else has.

                                                                                                                                                    edit: it took about 30 seconds to follow your profile link to your website -> to Flickr -> to snag image metadata and see what phone you own.

                                                                                                                                      2. -3

                                                                                                                                        They throttled the CPU of phones with failing batteries (even brand new ones!)

                                                                                                                                        This is untrue. They specifically singled out only older-model phones for this treatment. From the Apple link:

                                                                                                                                        About a year ago in iOS 10.2.1, we delivered a software update that improves power management during peak workloads to avoid unexpected shutdowns on iPhone 6, iPhone 6 Plus, iPhone 6s, iPhone 6s Plus and iPhone SE. [snip] We recently extended the same support to iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus in iOS 11.2.

                                                                                                                                        In other words, if you buy an iPhone 8 or X, no matter what condition the battery is in, Apple will not throttle the CPU. (In harsh environments–for example, with lots of exposure to cold temperatures–it’s very plausible that an 8 or X purchased new might by now have a degraded battery.)

                                                                                                                                        1. 2

                                                                                                                                          You are making a claim without any data to back it up.

                                                                                                                                          Can you prove that the batteries in the new iPhones suffer voltage drops when they are degraded? If they use a different design with more/smaller cells then AIUI they would be significantly less likely to have voltage drops when overall capacity is degraded.

                                                                                                                                          But no, instead you continue to troll because you have a grudge against Apple. Take your crap elsewhere. It’s not welcome here.

                                                                                                                                          1. 3

                                                                                                                                            You’re moving the goalposts. You claimed Apple is throttling the CPU of brand new phones. You were shown this to be incorrect, and have not brought any new info to the table. Your claim that the newer phones might be designed so as to not require throttling is irrelevant.

                                                                                                                                            Please don’t accuse (multiple) people of trolling. It reflects poorly on yourself. All are welcome here.

                                                                                                                                            1. 3

                                                                                                                                              You can buy a brand new phone directly from Apple (iPhone 6S) with a faulty battery and experience the throttling. I had this happen.

                                                                                                                                    2. 1

                                                                                                                                      Google services update in the background even when other updates are disabled. Even if services updates are not intended to slow down the phone, they still do.

                                                                                                                                    3. 3

                                                                                                                                      The new features on phones are so fucking stupid as well.

                                                                                                                                      I think the consumer who pays for it is stupid.

                                                                                                                                      1. 3

                                                                                                                                        It’s both. The user wants something new every year and OEMs don’t have anything worthwhile each year so they change things for the sake of change like adding rounded corners on the LCD or cutting a chunk out of the top. It makes it seem like something is new and worth buying when not much worthwhile has actually changed.

                                                                                                                                        1. 4

                                                                                                                                          I think companies would always take the path of least resistance that works. If consumers didn’t fall for such stupid tricks the companies that did them would die off.

                                                                                                                                    4. 2

                                                                                                                                      Yep. I guess humanity’s biggest achievement will be to terraform itself out of existence.

                                                                                                                                      This planet does neither bargain nor care about this civilizations’ decision making processes. It will keep flying around the sun for a while, with or without humans on it.

                                                                                                                                      I’m amazed by the optimism people display in response to pointing out that the current trajectory of climate change makes it highly unlikely that our grand-grand-children will ever be born.

                                                                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                                                                        The list is endless, and it all comes down to the American ethos that making money is a sacred right that trumps all other concerns.

                                                                                                                                        s/American/human

                                                                                                                                        You can’t fix a problem if you misunderstand what causes it.

                                                                                                                                        1. 5

                                                                                                                                          Ideology matters, and America has been aggressively promoting toxic capitalist ideology for many decades around the world. Humans aren’t perfect, but we can recognize our problems and create systems around us to help mitigate them. Capitalism is equivalent of giving a flamethrower to a pyromaniac.

                                                                                                                                          1. 3

                                                                                                                                            If you want to hash out how “toxic capitalism” is ruining everything, that’s fine–I’m just observing that many other countries (China, Germany, India, Mozambique, Russia, etc.) have done things that, to me at least, dispel the notion of toxic capitalism as purely being American in origin.

                                                                                                                                            And to avoid accusations of whataboutism, the reason I point those other countries out is that if a solution is put forth assuming that America is the problem–and hence itself probably grounded in approaches unique to an American context–it probably will not be workable in other places.

                                                                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                                                                              Nobody is saying that capitalism alone is the problem or that it’s unique to America. I was saying that capitalism is clearly responsible for a lot of harm, and that America promotes it aggressively.

                                                                                                                                              1. 0

                                                                                                                                                Don’t backpedal. You wrote:

                                                                                                                                                The list is endless, and it all comes down to the American ethos that making money is a sacred right that trumps all other concerns.

                                                                                                                                                As to whether or not capitalism is clearly responsible for a lot of harm, it’s worth considering what the alternatives have accomplished.

                                                                                                                                                1. 0

                                                                                                                                                  Nobody is backpedaling here, and pointing at other failed systems saying they did terrible things too isn’t much of an argument.

                                                                                                                                      1. 1

                                                                                                                                        What’s vidconf like and is it really better than other (lower-bandwidth) comm methods?

                                                                                                                                        I live in Australia and I have troubles with video conferencing software. I believe my upload speed (1MBit at best) is one of the primary causes to blame. This seems to be similar to most Australians.

                                                                                                                                        There are many places in the world with internet slower than Australia’s. Combined with the fact that live voice and non-live internet comm methods are so decent these days I’m not sure what place videoconferencing has.

                                                                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                                                                          Video still communicates a lot more than text. Possibly the best replacement might be not emoji, but those animated gifs you share like in Telegram. Truly a new form of communication!

                                                                                                                                        1. 2

                                                                                                                                          Finally , my c++ expertise is cool again!

                                                                                                                                          1. 8

                                                                                                                                            The act of powering up a computer, waiting for it to boot, doing some work, and then waiting for it to shut down gracefully is a barbaric ritual from ancient times. In 2018, we’re all modern and hip and just want to open up the laptop lid and get to work. Unfortunately this is easier said than done and as such it really only works reliably with the right combination of supported hardware. And even then, bugs in various layers of the OS can cause it to suddenly stop working consistently after an OS update.

                                                                                                                                            This is one of the things keeping me on MacOS. The laptops are expensive for what they are, but the Just Works factor is pretty high.

                                                                                                                                            1. 10

                                                                                                                                              This is one of the things keeping me on MacOS. The laptops are expensive for what they are, but the Just Works factor is pretty high.

                                                                                                                                              Have you found that to still be the case with recent models and OS revisions? That’s also the reason I’m on macOS, but it’s gotten less true for me over the past 3-4 years. The worst is that sleep/hibernate no longer seems to work reliably, and it happens on two completely different devices, a MacBook Pro (2016 model) and a MacBook Air (2014 model). About once a month, one will fail to properly wake from sleep when opening the case. Sometimes it fails to wake entirely; sometimes it seemingly wakes but won’t turn the backlight on (in the 2nd case it sometimes flashes on briefly). Usually this ends up requiring a hard powercycle to fix. Googling suggests I’m not alone, and there’s a whole pile of cargo-cart suggestions for fixing it (NVRAM resets and such). That’s by far the worst issue, but there’s a bunch of software-side stuff seemingly getting more flaky too (especially the App Store app, which sometimes requires a reboot to convince the Updates tab to load).

                                                                                                                                              In 10 years of using PowerBook and MacBook laptops 2004–14 I never had that kind of basic functionality fail to work flawlessly, and I would’ve completely agreed with you back then, which is why I kept buying them.

                                                                                                                                              1. 6

                                                                                                                                                I can confirm your experience - I sometimes have the issue with waking from sleep, and regularly see the OS freezing for extended periods of time (I do have a lot of applications open, but come on, it’s 2018). The quality of software has been declining over the last 4 years. Unfortunately, I still don’t see any better alternative.

                                                                                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                                                                                  I am sorry, are you talking about your actual computer or was this a metaphor about human condition?

                                                                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                                                                    Haha, it’s true, we’re all sleepwalking through life most of the time.

                                                                                                                                              2. 6

                                                                                                                                                Get a Thinkpad.

                                                                                                                                                1. 4

                                                                                                                                                  The laptops are expensive for what they are, but the Just Works factor is pretty high.

                                                                                                                                                  So, not really expensive for what they are, given that apparently no others do what they do, reliably?

                                                                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                                                                    I wasn’t clear that I was referring primarily to the hardware - Windows 10 laptops with better specs (especially the GPU) and comparable build quality can be significantly cheaper than a new Macbook Pro.

                                                                                                                                                    1. 1

                                                                                                                                                      It’s the Apple Tax: “In the end, we found each Apple machine to cost more than a similarly equipped PC counterpart, with the baseline Mac Pro being the exception. Usually the delta is around $50 to $150…”

                                                                                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                                                                                        So firstly, that’s an article from 8 years ago, that also highlights Apple machines having longer battery life, better resistance to malware, and use higher quality materials.

                                                                                                                                                        Secondly, the thread is about a feature that works quite reliably on Apple computers, but very poorly on generic PC’s running Linux.

                                                                                                                                                        So, if you want to call “better, more reliable features” a TAX, then we have to agree to label any product anywhere that is objectively better than it’s competitors, and has a higher price, “Includes CompanyName TAX”

                                                                                                                                                        Got a HP laptop that works faster than a piece of shit Chromebook? Must be a HP Tax.

                                                                                                                                                        Got a BMW that has more comfortable seats than a Camry? Must be a BMW Tax.

                                                                                                                                                        1. 3

                                                                                                                                                          Any time a person ever gave me a set of Mac specs I was able to find a cheaper Windows machine that could do the same with hardware that works well. It’s not shocking at all to me given Apple’s marketing strategy of going for high margins. They’re currently one of the most profitable companies in the world with that strategy. Whereas, most of the other vendors became something more like commodities competing so hard on things like price. Your strawman comparisons don’t change that.

                                                                                                                                                          1. 4

                                                                                                                                                            And any time a person ever said to me “I found this non-Apple machine with the same features/specs” they conveniently leave out features that they personally don’t place value on.

                                                                                                                                                            We can trade anecdotal stories all day, but the article you linked to, doesn’t really support your argument the way you seem to think it does.

                                                                                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                                                                                              Yup. Buying a product purely on paper specs instead of including things like build quality seems foolish.

                                                                                                                                                              Macs aren’t that expensive anyways when you compare them to machines in the same class, like ThinkPads, Surfaces, XPSes, Latitudes, etc.

                                                                                                                                                    2. 2

                                                                                                                                                      The thing keeping me on macOS is being able to use Control and Alt for emacs style shortcuts for editing text anywhere (like my browser’s URL bar) because all the system keyboard shortcuts use the Command key.

                                                                                                                                                      https://jblevins.org/log/kbd

                                                                                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                                                                                        Same. Apple can’t be beaten there in the current ecosystem. It just won’t happen. Unless Red Hat acquires a hardware vendor and builds a HatBook, there’s no chance. And they won’t do that because it’s not profitable enough.

                                                                                                                                                        1. 6

                                                                                                                                                          This is basically the idea behind Librem laptops.

                                                                                                                                                          1. 7

                                                                                                                                                            If only they had gigantic truckloads of money.

                                                                                                                                                            1. 6

                                                                                                                                                              Only way to make that happen is to vote with our wallets. :)

                                                                                                                                                            2. 1

                                                                                                                                                              I like the idea of librem, but unfortunately I cant see myself buying a laptop without a trackpoint…

                                                                                                                                                            3. 2

                                                                                                                                                              There are some nice vendors where this Just Works. I use system76. Dell xps developer laptops are also great linux laptops.

                                                                                                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                                                                                                As a very happy Surface Book user, I’d argue you’ve forgotten about the other OS vendor.

                                                                                                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                                                                                                  I’ve had this working on a de-chromed chomebook and xubuntu for a long time, the key is using not too new hardware maybe?

                                                                                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                                                                                    That’s definitely the key. And while I’m glad you have a setup you’re happy with and have no doubt it works for you, I doubt it works for everyone, or even a majority.

                                                                                                                                                              1. 8

                                                                                                                                                                Scrum may be the illness; it is more likely an expression of a deeper problem that may be inextricable. Either way, it has pushed more experienced, excellent developers out of the industry than I care to count.

                                                                                                                                                                Software is the only industry in the world where people above IQ 120 with 5 years of experience (even well above 120, and well above 5 years) have to justify days and weeks– hell, sometimes even hours– of their own working time. No one capable will tolerate that if she can get something else. Scrum is a great way to end up with the Dead Sea Effect.

                                                                                                                                                                I call Scrum the Whisky Goggles of programming. It turns the unemployable 3’s into marginally employable 5’s, but the 6+ see you as a foolish, dangerous drunk and want nothing to do with you.

                                                                                                                                                                I also doubt that it will change. It works well enough to get to the next round of funding. Hiring massive armies of mediocre programmers has become “the way it’s done”. Now it’s reminiscent of “Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM.”

                                                                                                                                                                Those of us in the top ~5 percent, we had our time. It seems to be over, at least in this industry. Some of us will reinvent ourselves as “data scientists” and hope to escape the hell of burndown story points and product “individuals”; some of us will go back to graduate school and either escape into academia or vie for the few remaining R&D jobs that Scrum can’t touch; many of us will just leave and do something else.

                                                                                                                                                                1. 4

                                                                                                                                                                  I’m going to let out a big secret that I probably shouldn’t about Scrum. I’m going to quote one of your recent posts on medium because I think it is relevant.

                                                                                                                                                                  The one thing that universally turns up when people investigate workplace violence is… not race, not mental health, not disputes with co-workers or management, but exactly that type of “performance management”, which is the euphemism for this sort of psychotic, evil surveillance capitalism. It literally drives people nuts.

                                                                                                                                                                  Where are the managers in Scrum? The answer, there aren’t any. Scrum is sold to businesses as a technique to exponentially increase productivity. However, the this is a lie, a foot in the door technique. The reason the other 95% of IT workers like it is that Scrum is a worker emancipatory movement. No more managers, no more long hours, no more abuse, no more performance management.

                                                                                                                                                                  Scrum is not meant to protect the gifted 5% of engineers who worked privileged environments, who never deal with the kind of abuse other 95% of IT workers have to. It’s was never designed to make life easier for those that already have an easy life. Scrum isn’t meant for the already privileged 5%.

                                                                                                                                                                  You mention high IQ like it’s a good thing. In the words of Alan Kay, high IQ is a lead weight, your viewpoint is everything.

                                                                                                                                                                  1. 6

                                                                                                                                                                    Software is the only industry in the world where people above IQ 120 with 5 years of experience (even well above 120, and well above 5 years) have to justify days and weeks– hell, sometimes even hours– of their own working time

                                                                                                                                                                    That’s … not true at all. If you look at jobs done by actual engineers, you’ll see that they routinely have to provide time estimates. In order to make those time estimates, they have to estimate their work to the day and week, even if those detailed timelines aren’t provided to their clients. Even newly-licensed engineers already have 4 or more years of experience, since work requirements are part of the license process. Most people who are engineers have high IQ, because they’re complicated technical fields with nontrivial education requirements. And they all must pass an exam on engineering ethics.

                                                                                                                                                                    And they provide time, labor, and cost estimates to clients.

                                                                                                                                                                    Which is much like what we do in software development. We put together estimates in as detailed a way as we can, to provide an overall plan. We tell our customers the overall plan, and we track against our detailed plan so we know if we have to tell the customer the plans have changed.

                                                                                                                                                                    Actual engineers are currently far better as an industry at providing those types of estimates. If we ever want to mature as an industry, we must improve our ability to estimate our work.

                                                                                                                                                                    Claiming that we’re above the need to estimate because we’re smart and we have experience misunderstands the need. Being smart and having experience should make us more comfortable and confident providing estimates, rather than less comfortable even being asked.

                                                                                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                                                                                    How useful is road data without meta-data that can’t be found in an image, like the name, direction, and whether it’s public? There’s some value, but it can’t realistically be used for routing or navigation.

                                                                                                                                                                    1. 3

                                                                                                                                                                      This is only useful for

                                                                                                                                                                      a) Matching against existing graphs and creating higher fidelity versions or correcting existing map geometry. b) Seed roads for attribution in remote and unmapped areas and countries.