312 karma · joined March 13, 2018
https://theriffrepeater.com/rocksmith-announces-new-rocksmit...
Case in point: keepass -> keepassx -> keepassxc, where both keepass and keepassxc are maintained and are essentially separate projects.
Contribution graph for the original uBlock project during this time frame: https://github.com/uBlock-LLC/uBlock/graphs/contributors?fro...
and now compare to the 'personal fork' that is uBlock Origin: https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/graphs/contributors?from=2...
So if 'squatting' the name of your own OSS project is considered 'user hostile' then let this be a lesson to people considering giving up their project: the person you give it to may abuse your trust and the trust of the community in order to further their own agenda, in this situation it was all just pretty harmless petty drama but it might not always work out so well.
Random Github projects aren't organisations with funding and staff with rules and responsibilities to keep the project running, it's okay to archive the project and let the community decide what to do, giving the project to the first person who asks may end up achieving the same thing as archiving the project or it may come back to bite you in the arse damaging your reputation in the process.
After the split from Labour and failing to see success in his own New Party he went on a study tour of Italy and it's here you see the sharp turn towards the right wing and the formation of the BUP which was obviously authoritarian corporate fascism, strongly anti-Communist, and frequently clashed with Jewish groups.
As dragonwriter notes in his posts in this thread, corporatism is something that's sometimes shared among these ideologies but the gulf between those ideologies can still be pretty large, authoritarian nationalism inherently excludes certain groups in societies and is worlds apart from some other forms of socialism even if the goal of both is to end or reduce class conflict.
Perhaps, but in terms of TNT equivalence picric acid is much more effective at 96% compared to 56% of ammonium nitrate[0] with other estimates being even wider[1] i.e., 1.17x for picric acid to 0.74x for ANFO and 0.42x for ammonium nitrate, and some other figures are placing ammonium nitrate as low as 20% as effective. With the estimates ranging from a low 500 tonnes, ~1.2 kilotonnes for a reasonable estimate up to about a maximum ~2.2 kilotonnes based on 2,750 tonnes of ANFO it's looking like the two explosions aren't that comparable. But I do agree, early estimates of loss of life can be troublesome and both explosions were devastatingly large.
[0] https://www.icheme.org/media/12120/xi-paper-13.pdf
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TNT_equivalent#Relative_effect...
People literally can see the difference between blue and green even if their language doesn't differentiate between the two, I don't know if you're misremembering a claim and a negation sneaked in so please don't take this post too harshly if that's the case, but the idea that say Japanese people can't tell the difference between blue and green is patently false and should be addressed, in fact the video you linked almost does so at 2:34 -
>Some researchers took this and other ancient writings to wrongly speculate that earlier societies were colour blind.
That Homer described the ocean as wine in colour is not an issue of perception but one of language in trying to describe a colour that is not differentiated from other colours, the same is true for other 'perception' issues in the ancient world like green coloured honey. To be clear visual acuity tests have been done on modern populations and tribes which don't differentiate between such colours or overall define less colour categories and it should be no surprise to learn that they can see the difference between those colours just fine.
The whole idea that it's a difference in perception is fraught with issues, like what happens when a language naturally develops words for new categories of colours or new colours? Does a generation undergo the collective experience of literally being able to see/differentiate a new colour? If so why isn't this written about more, is it something that only happens in kids? What would be the reason for this sudden shift in perspective, because it certainly isn't a physiological change that occurs.
What happens when an adult learns a second language which differentiates between more colours? The classic romanticised view here is that learning a new language literally let's you see the world in a different perspective, but then why is it that enhanced perspective rarely more than a curiosity (language x has two words for this colour)? The Russian language has separate words for a dark blue (siniy) and a light blue (goluboy) but English doesn't differentiate between them, do the Russians see an extra colour? What does the science say? Well the science is somewhat interesting here, Russians are able to differentiate between dark blues and lighter blues ever so slightly faster (124ms), but this is worlds apart from the claim that some languages are literally capable of seeing more colours.
In general this line of thinking is known as linguistic relativity, or the view that language shapes perception and cognition, and is something that has generally been discredited among linguists as being discriminatory and harmful as well as being based on faulty reasoning or studies and occasionally fraudulent papers. For example, and I really don't mean to attribute any malice to your post, but if we're considering Homer as being unable to differentiate between an ocean blue and a dark red wine, what do we make of cultures and languages that don't differentiate between smoking, drinking, or eating? Do they not know the difference between those actions? What about the Pirahã people who only have two words (differentiated by tone) for 'small quantity' and 'large quantity' and no other words for numerals? This line of thinking is fairly harmless when applied to the way we perceive colours but can be actively harmful to people who perceive the world the exact same way we do but don't have as expressive language for these particular topics.
For anybody interested in more linguistic oddities and/or the damage linguistic relativism can do I recommend the book 'The Language Hoax' by John McWhorter, there's also an hour long talk on it available on Youtube [0]. The book deals with the more recent studies on how language affects the ways we think in a grounded way and shows how minor some of the best examples given can be like in the case of dark and light blue in Russian. The book is also in response to the general public's view and romanticism of linguistic relativity and in particular in response to a book by another linguist Guy Deutscher titled 'Through the Language Glass', where Guy feeds into the perception that language helps shape the way we think, and it is a good book but it still doesn't get close to saying that other languages see more colours.
As far as the terminology goes, keep in mind that the people defending the OSI are generally the people or at least in line with the people that coined and popularised the terms and their continued usage, and while that may seem like an easy way to dismiss certain talking points it's a point that's going to keep being brought up in response to the argument of feigned ignorance to the terms, and I don't mean this to come across as too mean but something like open source has 20 years of mindshare, free software 30 years, more broad but still applicable terms like open access 40 years, or the greater cultural undercurrent much longer than that. At a certain point even the most well meaning individuals who are looking at existing open source licences and creating their own with the express intention of avoiding commercial exploitation[0], a problem almost exclusive to open source licenced software, are going to recognise that what they're doing isn't entirely in line with the existing open source ethos, and I don't think it's unfair or entirely unexpected that people will point out that it's not part of the open source ethos.
[0] From the licence: 'Under no circumstances shall the Person be permitted, allowed or authorized to commercially exploit the Software.', but other similar and more fleshed out licences might make the connection to open source software being exploited more explicit.
None of this is perfect or easy to set up and it's in no way a substitute for fractional scaling support in the toolkits of the programs you're using but it has worked for a very long time and produces appropriately sized crisp and sharp fonts on all monitors, and more importantly it should work reasonably well even on outdated programs or toolkits that have no support for fractional scaling. The Arch wiki link should explain this but it's not spelled out and there's a bit of a misconception that fractional scaling is the only way to get a blur free HiDPI experience on Linux when that just isn't the case at all.
There's a strong case to be made that the purpose of a dictionary is to aid communication by describing the usage of words so I think it's clear that 'irregardless' deserves a mention although with a warning on usage, which seems to be the case here with Merriam-Webster describing it as non-standard and the OED going a step further and saying it's not correct. Language prescriptivists usually deserve the lectures on the usefulness of descriptive dictionaries that they get but I don't think that it's always useful to go to the extreme and celebrate confusing or commonly understood as incorrect usage of words despite some minor usage. The article brings up a good word that was changed over confusion which was inflammable becoming flammable as the 'in' suffix could be taken to meaning a negator and I don't think anybody really had an issue with this, although it does say that 'flammable' is malformed but I really don't see how.
Also noticed that it feels slow page to page, thinking that it might be an issue with my Firefox configuration I opened the page on a fresh profile and it's still slow, but if you open it in Chrome page to page becomes almost instant and is more comparable to MediaWiki. So maybe this particular performance issue on FF can be resolved but it does seem like a worse end user experience when compared to MediaWiki.
The Scandinavian results are interesting but they do seem to be outliers, Sweden is definitely an outlier but maybe if you look at all the Nordic countries and include Iceland the results won't be too interesting.
We had the whole 'masks don't work' song and dance too and by all accounts England is one of the worst countries for mask adoption rates despite a decent majority of the country thinking that they work, adoption rates might change a little when masks become mandatory in shops in a little over a week but for most people it's after the strict lockdown has ended and well past the point of being necessary. So I'd agree with you here, it has been very hard to take the official advice seriously and it's a real shame that a government is muddying the waters for political reasons.
https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/12467792104101437...
https://twitter.com/10DowningStreet/status/12468073039756206...
Powerlifting as a sport is full of gimmicks and fads, the post struck out to me as calling out these gimmicks and fads and to return to the basics and bare essentials with the lowest barrier of entry, which to me seems to be for a good reason as the fads often come across as gatekeeping the sport and raising the barrier to entry in general, which begs the question, is it gatekeeping to call out such gatekeeping behaviour? To put it another way, would it be gatekeeping to suggest that healthy weight people don't need to follow fad diets to remain at a healthy weight? Is it gatekeeping to call out often times harmful fad diets? Is it denigrating to the people following said diets? The implication seems to be that it's wrong to gatekeep even if the purpose is to caution against spending money on gimmicks or fads that might not be the best way to achieve a persons goals.
As a metric average speed has issues as it can translate to how much people are willing to pay as opposed to what's available but it's still useful to look at here - 46 Mbps for the country, but that's driven mostly by Cable which has an average speed of 92 Mbps while Openreach sits at 30 Mbps, it's easy to speculate that BT are more interested in hitting government targets while Virgin are providing some competition that is so desperately needed.
As far as new and exciting applications for gigabit or at least fibre goes it needs to be wide spread and cheap enough for those opportunities to come to fruition and neither of those are really true, it's no good asking an average member of the public to pay £62 a month for a 500/35 Virgin broadband only plan or £58 and £68 respectively for a 500/75 or 900/110 BT broadband plan and expecting much to come of it when less than 20% of the population has such coverage. For a price comparison hyperoptic is £60 for 900/1000 and B4rn £30 for 1000/1000 - you should note both of these providers offer gigabit upload as well which goes a long way towards providing opportunities. The average upload of the country has only just inched to 10 Mbps after it was a mere 5 Mbps 3 years ago with many Virgin customers on the less expensive plans being stuck on 2/3 Mbps.
The UK has incredibly good coverage and the minimum service is relatively decent all things considered but the average service is still behind other European countries, with countries like Sweden and Switzerland being better on price while being substantially faster and more comparable countries like France and Spain still being cheaper while being slightly faster.
This is true but it depends on how long the sentence was as after a 4 year sentence you always have to tell an employer about the conviction. It's better than nothing as petty crime shouldn't have serious long term employment consequences but it seems like it doesn't do much for the people that might need it most.
[0] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53033550
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53031072
[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/14/met-police-con...
I'm not trying to tell you that you're wrong or that far right groups didn't attend and I'm sorry if it came across that way, I was hesitant to even make a reply for fear it would come across as a defence of groups I'm ideologically opposed to over protests I don't agree with. The only point I wanted to discuss really was the Nazi salutes since 'protestors defending Churchill statue perform Nazi salute' seems to be the sticking point of social commentary on the counter protests, but the supposed video where it happens is questionable. But I'm happy to be proven wrong on that, just like I was the involvement from Britain First which is why I edited the post, so again sorry if it seems like I'm trying to downplay their involvement.
As far as the EDL / Britain First goes, this is literally the first time I'm hearing that the leader of Britain First showed up, it seems like it was drowned out of the news completely. Are there any pictures of said flags or the scale of their involvement? I don't recall seeing any at the time and I can't find any pics at all. Edit: Found one [2], it's of the leader.
[0] https://twitter.com/OwenJones84/status/1271763042745925632
[1] https://twitter.com/BBCDomC/status/1271761377317851136
[2] https://twitter.com/hopenothate/status/1271772683013931008
>I can send an IP packet to Europe faster than I can send a pixel to the screen. How f’d up is that?
and to relate to the other post about landlines: https://twitter.com/ID_AA_Carmack/status/992778768417722368
>I made a long internal post yesterday about audio latency, and it included “Many people reading this are too young to remember analog local phone calls, and how the lag from cell phones changed conversations.”
As far as legal fees goes, how is this any different than any other frivolous letter from a lawyer? Do you find that it's common in your experience for independent web developers to close up shop as soon as they get a cease and desist? I really don't mean to sound patronising but the concern here comes across as an incredibly American view point, much of the world uses the English rule when it comes to legal fees where the losing party pays the legal fees (within reason) for the winning party[0], getting taken to court is still no walk in the park and it doesn't completely stop frivolous lawsuits but the difference in lawsuit culture should speak for itself.
But all of that is a moot point, the GDPR is a civil law with civil penalties and it's not something you're taken to court over, as the other commentator mentions I'm not even sure if lawyers can deal with GDPR complaints privately, instead what happens is each EU27(+UK) member state has an independent public authority[1] who is responsible for dealing with GDPR complaints when the complainant can't resolve the issue with you directly. Some countries like the UK only sparingly give large fines to larger companies while others like Spain and the German speaking countries hand out fines for breaking the law like candy[2].
So how does the GDPR restrict running an IRC logging service (in the EU+UK)? At the very least users need to be informed in a clear and simple manner of what you are doing, this could be done through sending a notice or a message to a user when they join a channel. You may need to provide an opt-out mechanism which would be a lot better for compliance and almost completely covers your arse but it's likely not necessary, informed consent can likely be assumed when they don't leave the channel after being notified that it's publicly logged, and if the issue of consent is truly a concern and you don't want to selectively allow users to opt-out of logging to preserve context in logs what you can do instead is have the channel opt-in where the user never receives voice until explicitly consenting to the log bot. Tech support (i.e., programming, distro) channels likely have a better argument for assuming consent as the nature of these channels isn't for personal discussions, it's common for these channels to have logging bot as well. For the most part what users publicly send to a channel is not considered PII, this is especially true for tech support orientated questions. You may need to provide a mechanism to modify/(pseudo)anonymise/remove personal information, it'd be smart to modify the logger to tokenise user and host names to make replacing text easier and this also allows you to anonymises the data incredibly easily.
IRC being what it is works in your favour here, the only PII you should ever have on users are their usernames(+ 'name' field, maybe 'real name' field too, host mask) and potentially their IP if the IRC server hasn't already anonymised it for you, some PII can still leak into logs like if a user accidentally pastes their email address publicly and it'd be prudent to deal with requests asking you to remove it, but for the most part the extra burden placed upon you would only be to deal with those requests, and as already discussed most logs aren't considered PII so you shouldn't need to remove much. It would be unlikely that somebody even complains to the relevant supervisory authority but if that were the case they'd first try to establish that you've handled requests to remove data appropriately, and then that you have the grounds to be doing what you're doing, etc. But if that's too much of a burden and you're not a European citizen then you have nothing to worry about, ignore the requests and follow your own countries laws, as stated it's constitutionally protected in America.
I know you were making a general point about the effect the GDPR has on the internet but I really do disagree with the parallels to the chilling effect, to have your freedom of expression censored you have to actively ignore other peoples rights to privacy, and as far as IRC logging bots go it's likely one of the easiest services to make complaint.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_rule_(attorney%27s_fee...
[0] http://themainframe.ca/content/images/2015/09/Pyrex-infograp...
P.S. that post mentions internal engineering/ops teams switching from Slack to Matrix, that'd boost Matrix numbers if they weren't using IRC already. Perhaps that's an accessibility issue if Matrix was offering features that Slack had and IRC was missing.
I made a mistake though, nobody else in the comment chain was talking about Rust or developers. I had read a comment in another part of the thread which linked to Mozilla's forums [0] which mentioned more people in the developers channels on the Matrix instance, which I had mistakenly assumed was part of this comment chain, hence the question relating to developers.
[0] https://discourse.mozilla.org/t/synchronous-messaging-at-moz...
>The number of participants in our primary development channels has already exceeded their counterparts on IRC at their most active [...]