![](https://slrpnk.net/pictrs/image/20f84a27-e60f-498b-a058-d6e2cee130ba.webp)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/1f477879-f269-4fc2-805c-3cb0fe552f40.png)
I think they’re just making fun of the bad font kerning in the app which causes a gap in the word Unmanaged
I think they’re just making fun of the bad font kerning in the app which causes a gap in the word Unmanaged
There’s 102 people mentioned in that commit and two of them happen to meet in the comments of a meme thread on Lemmy of all places. I love the Internet.
“Because I feel like it.”
So in other words, because she wants to? As in, “because it’s her body and she can do whatever she wants with it”?
I don’t know, that sounds like hard, thankless work that will take years of consistent effort, dealing with countless setbacks and losses but not giving up, before finally achieving our goals of making real and meaningful change. What if instead if that I just don’t buy Starbucks, will that work?
Plants aren’t sentient. When we say they “feel pain” and “communicate” we don’t mean like sentient creatures. We just don’t have better words to accurately convey the mechanics at play here. Computers also “communicate”.
The only difference between Tumblr and Facebook is size. Facebook isn’t uniquely evil; it does exactly what any corporation would do at that scale. The systems that molded Facebook into what it is would also mold Tumblr or anything else into the same abomination.
I would respect principled opposition to megacorps even if I think it’s still misguided in this instance, because at least that’s overall based. But all of the discourse focuses on the specific wrongdoings of Facebook as if any other corporation wouldn’t have done exactly the same thing in their position. It feels very kneejerk.
I want to federate and use it to destroy their platform. The biggest problem with the periodic social media “migrations” that always fail is that it creates a fragmented diaspora. Take Twitter as an example. When the big migration off Twitter was supposed to happen, some went to the Fediverse, some went to Threads, some went to BlueSky.
You know what happened? After a few weeks, most of them went back to Twitter, because that was the only common place between them, where they knew they could all meet and communicate. If Twitter was forced to federate with all other platforms, it would have been snuffed out by now. But if that was even proposed, everybody would have a kneejerk reaction, because Twitter bad. Nobody is thinking of the big picture.
I find it kind of strange that people seem so hesitant about it
I simply want the Fediverse to be a proper alternative option for social media access, not just another secret nerd club. We have enough of those already. That requires not completely closing off access to the things the typical person will want to access. I want all social media to eventually be interoperable like email is, preferably on the ActivityPub standard and not whatever centralized bullshit BlueSky is trying to cook up. That is the only way we’re going to break the corporate stranglehold on social media.
Put simply, if you make people choose between our platform and the large corporate-backed platform with orders of magnitude more users, they will choose the corporate platform almost every time. And I think that’s a bad outcome for all involved.
If Linux was that easy, adoption would be higher
People use what comes on the computer. OS usage on the Steam Deck is overwhelmingly Linux because that’s what comes on it. This indicates that Linux is perfectly fine for the average person, it just needs to come pre-installed. Very few people install their own OS either way, Linux or Windows.
I assume doog is the opposite of good, in which case I agree
Why doesn’t Israel stop doing things that require other countries to intervene
THIS IS A RED CUBE HOUSEHOLD
We’re supposed to be better than them. Countering their misinfo networks by creating our own misinfo networks isn’t being better than them.
Never ask ChatGPT to write code that you plan to actually use, and never take it as a source of truth. I use it to put me on a possible right path when I’m totally lost and lack the vocabulary to accurately describe what I need. Sometimes I’ll ask it for an example of how sometimes works so that I can learn it myself. It’s an incredibly useful tool, but you’re out of your damn mind if you’re just regularly copying code it spits out. You need to error check everything it does, and if you don’t know the syntax well enough to write it yourself, how the hell do you plan to reliably error check it?
These are scripts that manage stuff on a few hundred user endpoints and a few servers. They were doing basically everything manually until I got here, and the only way I could get them on board with my slow introduction of automation is to let them see it. I have to ensure things don’t get too long, complex, or hard to explain, or they start getting nervous.
I write a lot of fairly simple scripts in Bash and PowerShell that should be easily understood by anybody else with moderate experience in the language, but I leave a lot of obvious comments because my coworkers don’t write any code and are extremely skittish about my automations. I add them basically to quell their fears.
Arch very rarely breaks on its own. But if the manually driven style of Arch is not what you’re looking for, try OpenSUSE Tumbleweed or Slowroll.
We don’t believe that at all, we believe privacy is a human right.
That’s just a different way to phrase what I said about defending the good side of encryption.
Offline uncensored LLMs already exist, and will perpetually exist
I didn’t say they don’t exist, I said that the help and harm aren’t inseparable like with encryption.
We don’t defend tools doing harm, we acknowledge it.
“My point is that if you want to have a consistent view point, you need to acknowledge and defend the harmful sides.”
If you want to walk it back, fine, but don’t pretend like you didn’t say it.
What the fuck is this “you should defend harm” bullshit, did you hit your head during an entry level philosophy class or something?
The reason we defend encryption even though it can be used for harm is because breaking it means you can’t use it for good, and that’s far worse. We don’t defend the harm it can do in and of itself; why the hell would we? We defend it in spite of the harm because the good greatly outweighs the harm and they cannot be separated. The same isn’t true for LLMs.
AMD GPUs are fantastic on Linux. I’m running an MSI 6800XT and the only flaw is the the RGB lighting isn’t properly exposed so I can’t turn it off. Everything else just works and I’ve never had to give it a single thought since buying it. I just put it in and started playing my games.
When people recognize they were wrong about something, as smugly satisfying as it may be it’s not actually helpful to tell them that they should have been correct sooner.