Googler here, opinions are my own.
“coordinated plan that involved introducing small bugs on its sites that would only manifest for Firefox users.”
as if Googlers have time for that. I would guess simple pressure to launch fast, and not spending the eng effort optimizing for FF due to low market share.
The branding of the Fediverse under one banner with the branding of just one application is a little annoying.
Mozilla is a constant hit-and-miss. They are ultimately in conflict between what the users want (a free browser that protects their privacy) and making money (which is in advertising).
Ain’t that a sympathetic narrative? Jeje, I joke, but sometimes the skeptic in me wonders if it’s the sincere truth or just a(nother) justifiable masquerade for exploitative practices.
Practices that exploit their users trust that come from the “conflict between what the users want (a free browser that protects their privacy) and making money (which is in advertising).”
Personally, I’m not a fan of ads myself and you can opt out of them in the settings just like you can opt out on the web with an ad blocker.
That all being said, please do note that Mozilla is a business and businesses need money to operate. For the majority of the web this means ads. For the majority of ads it also means tracking. But the mechanisms around sponsored stories in Firefox are not tracking.
It’s more cool than the other real options out there, so I’ll accept anything so long as they are tracking me less than Chrome.
I’ve reconsidered my position on Net Neutrality. The idea that without government controls ISPs would throttle speeds sounded plausible, yet after the rules were scrapped speeds in the US jumped 30%.
Seems to me the marketplace is a better way to ensure fast internet. If my ISP misbehaves, I can switch. The last mile issue is becoming less and less relevant, so why gum up the Works with regulations that are expensive to enforce?
If my ISP misbehaves, I can switch
Millions of people, at least in the US, cannot switch to a comparable alternative, so this argument does not really make sense for many people.
They likely did this to win people over, like you. But if all ISPs agree to do the same thing, you can’t really switch later. Forming cartels is the easiest thing for a market with so few players.
Diversity should be a goal, but it should be a diversity of ideas, not skin color or gender. It doesn’t make sense to have three people who look different but all think the same.
However I’m not sure how an organization like Gnu would benefit from something like that, given some of their stances on free software. Their organization would probably have an upper limit of dissent from their values related to that. Is that such a bad thing I wonder?
How much diversity of ideas do we currently have when the majority of the white males in tech think affirmative action to conterbalance social injustices is literally the same as racism?
If you’re descriminating between individuals on the basis of race, you’re a racist. “Positive discrimination” is still “discrimination”.
Racism is the belief in a race to be superior to others. Discrimination by itself it neither good nor bad. For instance, people with disabilities are discriminated (positively) against when they get dedicated parking spaces and special care, yet no one is decrying it as hatred against able-bodied people, because it serves a social good.
After reading this I looked around for an OSM app that would be a relatively decent replacement for Google Maps, it looks like OsmAnd Maps might do the trick. One thing that’s missing for me is public transit, but Citymapper does a good job of that. It’s just nice to flip between car/transit/bike/walk quickly to get a sense of how long each method will take.
Not yet! It was also high on the list of OSM map apps, but I’m a bit worried that it was acquired by a Russian internet company.
One aspect of OSM that kind of disappoints me is the lack of global standardization for tags. OSM seems to be more meant for local maps, as mappers within a region will agree on methods for tagging features.
I agree, I think Wikidata has handled this much better. But to be fair, coming up with an universal ontology is a hard problem.
Yeah absolutely, I doubt we’d have as many different types of things mapped out if everyone had to agree to a universal standard.
A bug in the kernel takes down the whole system. The more code in the kernel, the greater the chance the whole system goes down. Don’t put things in the kernel that aren’t absolutely necessary…
Error reporting is necessary; The error message can be generated from the report when being sent to to the user interface.
Hence internationalization is necessary. Internationalization is error reporting. User interface part is called localization, and I agree it can be done outside the kernel.
The article itself contains little to no useful content. What it links to is really the content of the piece.
Perhaps of more interest is the comparison of different single-board computers on Wikipedia.
I think monetization will be important. Many YouTube uploaders live off YouTube monetization schemes. Without monetization they won’t move.
People respond to incentives. In YouTube’s case that looks like “smash that subscribe button”, padding for time, a video every day until burning out, weird toddler videos, etc. It’s hard to design a business model that pays video creators for novel work done sustainably, but doing so could be a cultural shift, especially in programming for children/teens.
I think some sort of integration/easy onboarding with platforms like liberapay would be an incredibly useful feature for uploaders.
It’s doable! There’s people working to make subscriptions a thing. Right now you can directly back people using Patreon.
Counterpoint youtube’s monetization is so fickle and poorly implemented that most successful youtubers actually live off of patreon or a patreon alternative. Patreon or as someone else said LibrePay is completely compatible with Peertube.
I watch couple of youtubers and I’ve never heard from them anything except ‘Like’ and ‘Subscribe’ (anecdotal experience).
There will be federation with ActivityPub in the future but I haven’t added that yet. You can subscribe to this issue if you want updates on that feature https://gitlab.com/pikatrack/pikatrack/issues/32
if you are at all in a vulnerable place, skip reading the comments about this on places like reddit or phoronix. the amount of hate being conveyed is disappointing if unsurprising.
I’m appalled but not surprised to see this much hate in reddit, Slashdot, Hacker News and such. They were never inclusive communities to begin with, but somehow the quality of discussion exponentially went down in the last few years. I’m trying to think of a catalyst, but I’m not sure. Perhaps 4chan’s /g/ is to blame, as 4chan itself decayed into toxic sludge. Gamergate came out of /v/ after all.
I was interested in that and wrote a small script to see where the 120 (-1 for deleted comments) reddit users comment besides the r/linux thread about the new CoC.
I only looked at the 100 latest comments of each user.
The list contains the number of unique users who commented in the subreddit.
I expected a bit more users frequent the same subreddits, but there are also many new accounts.
It more or less confirms my suspicions. If I weren’t familiar with /r/linux as a community, I would’ve suspected brigading. It’s not a good look either way.
They can do this because Windows is closed-source and no one can fork Windows. Look at the Chrome and WWW situation, Chrome is open source, so if community is actively protesting, they are taking it into account.
Morale: use fork-able (open source) software.
Right but also on the list.
I mean, firefox gets listed because it recommends nonfree software; chromium gets listed because it has unlicensed components (aka proprietary).
There’s an important difference there.
Please consider having it published on F-Droid!
Whatever F-Droid build tooling is in homebrew seems to be old, so I’m having some weird issues.
Pi-hole combines lists from multiple sources, and has some pretty stats and a UI to configure it. So overall it’s a much more complete product.
Employers are seeing the potential benefits of shorter working weeks without any sort of union intervention. I think Hazlitt addressed the absurdity of the modern union pretty well, in his 1946 classic Economics in One Lesson.
(And the “brothers and sisters, it’s us vs them” rhetoric is incredibly creepy and cultish)
Very interesting. Do you have supporting links for employers moving towards shorter weeks? I haven’t noticed any movement in that direction, only a few isolated examples like Basecamp and that one company in New Zealand.
I remeber reading something on here about the 30 hour jobs movement and a newsletter, seen job listings talking about their reduced hours at equivalent pay levels, and personal experience - two friends of mine work 9 to 3:30 instead of the usual 9 to 5/5:30 at different programming jobs getting paid what they would working the same role elsewhere (lucky sods). The benefits must be apparent to their employers, so it’s an idea that must be catching on.
Sounds like a few more isolated cases (the newsletter stopped after three issues it seems), so I don’t think it stacks up as a counterargument to unions.
I know that France mandated a 35-hour work week, but even despite that they have many people working longer hours. So even regulation isn’t enough!
Unions were the ones to demand these 35 hour working weeks in France and the policy is one of the major drivers behind France’s massive unemployment and the subsequent yellow vest protests we’ve seen over the past months. Forcing such change is historically prone to massive failure, I don’t see why it would work this time.
Well, I guess then we can conclude that there’s nothing that will reduce working hours, and we are doomed to work 40+ hours for all time. It doesn’t happen by itself, and it doesn’t happen through union pressure and regulation either.
a new 30-hour jobs issue has just been sent out.
Saw it. Still not a movement by any means :)
As employers want to pay as little as possible and workers want to get paid as much as possible, there’s no way out of this contradiction. Maybe you feel a part of the family where you work, but your boss might not feel the same way.
What a ridiculous mess - refuted as far back as Adam Smith. There is an “economist”, at the dawn of the largest economic boom of all time, announcing that all the government policies that are driving the boom are catastrophic. All that government spending on the Marshall Plan, on education, on public works - it’s just a “diversion” of money that could have been more profitably invested in, I guess, hiring impoverished domestic servants. A good recent book on ecoomics is Mariana Mazzucato’s Value of everything. https://www.powells.com/book/-9781610396745.
Refuted as far back as Smith… By who? The economic “boom” was not a result of welfare policy or make-work schemes or excessive unionisation - the postwar US was handed exceptional circumstance in which to thrive. In the modern day those same policies lead to a $22T national debt and populace unprepared for a sudden $400 bill due to the pervasive Keynesian discouragement of saving.
I don’t think you read the book, because you sound like you missed the point, Hazlitt doesn’t encourage hiring “impoverished domestic servants”, but smaller government by virtue of letting people keep more of their money. I’ll maybe check out Mazzucato’s book some time, but it seems to handle a mostly different issue?…
Adam Smith. Who pointed out, among other things, that government policies to keep interest rates moderately low discouraged speculation and encouraged patient investing. Or consider Thomas Jefferson’s argument for exponential taxation on inheritance to prevent the kind of overconcentrated stagnant and oligarchic economic and political system he saw in France - where the mass of people could only hope for job cleaning the toilets of the rich. Or consider President Madison’s explanation of how Federal government intervention to encourage manufacturing might be contrary to theory, but worked (as it did). Mazzacuto goes through value creation in the modern economy and points out what should be obvious, that government investment in R&D and infrastructure is key to value creation. That’s something I learned as a graduate student a million years ago, reading the software that Bill Joy and others wrote at Berkeley, paid for by the defense department. It’s because government investment is not constrained by individual profit considerations that it can invest in hugely unprofitable projects like GPS and then give away the results. Keynes explained how government spending could end recessionary cycles, but it’s bizarre how people can drive down public roads, go to state or publically supported schools and universities, use the government created internet, and imagine wealthy people would have done all that on their own initiative..
I’m not here to argue in depth with what you’ve just said, I don’t think the comments section on lobsters is the place for that. However I think you must’ve misunderstood if you’ve actually read Hazlitt. He isn’t an anarchist. He’s the man who effortlessly tore Keynes a new one in The Failure of the New Economics, but that’s beside the point. Hazlitt was completely comfortable with the government doing certain things, just preferably not things based on the fundamental fallacy of failing to analyse the effects of a certain policy on all groups over the long term, as opposed to certain special interest groups.
He wouldn’t have argued against state provided roads (he actually says government is needed for bridge building in One Lesson) and other similar projects, don’t be ridiculous.