Unlike all the software you listed, it's open source and can be self-hosted in a way that you can be relatively confident that you're running what you intended to run?
1,214 karma · joined June 1, 2018
The declaration on human rights is not really government-centric, so the US-style free speech comparison makes little sense.
> what do they really mean?
They're a yardstick to measure how well we as humanity, and, more specifically particular regions or systems, measure up to what we, as humanity, consider to be the things that every human should (expect to) have. (Sorry for the bombasity.)
For instance, if we lived in a libertarian/anarchist utopia, with no government, it would still make sense to ask whether people's human rights were being met.
The fact that there's nobody to provide it, doesn't mean that it's not a basic human right.
[0] https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-huma...
> And then there's stuff like acquiring Pocket, something completely antithetical to Firefox's core values.
Pocket itself isn't antithetical to Firefox's values. It not being open source is, but from what I understand they're still working on making the server open source, though at disappointingly low priority.
Yes, of course. The point here is that a carbon tax further skews the situation in favour of the rich. We, as a society, accept the current situation as a compromise between fairness and "market efficiency", and hence are worried by shifts away from it.
To a large extent this is a "status quo bias", but it is natural — if people could afford something until now, but are suddenly being told that they won't be able to, they'll be, rightly or wrongly, unhappy.
Some of the reasons we don't want to do that are:
1. A carbon tax is regressive and might result in the middle class still being just about able to afford cars, but the lower class completely unable to, which would be unfair.
2. By forcing the shift away from the combustion engine with a ban, rather than just nudging away from it with a tax, we're providing a stronger spur to innovation.
Both of these reasons apply to supercars to a large extent:
1. Elites being able to buy combustion engine (super)cars, while the rest of society cannot, would be unfair.
2. Forcing companies to innovate in the case of supercars, which provide a greater engineering challenge, increases the chance that the all the relevant engineering obstacles are solved for "normal" cars.
IMO the two end-points:
1. We just introduce a sufficiently high carbon tax, together with appropriate redistribution to make up for its regressiveness, and let the free market decide whether combustion engines are still affordable after internalising the externality.
2. We ban the combustion engine on the basis that we're all in this together and we want to make sure that the transition definitely does occur.
are defensible. The middle-ground where we tax supercars, but ban all other combustion engine cars is far less so.
If Copilot were to reproduce a larger part of, say, an MIT-licensed codebase or almost any other permissive licence, then they should legally provide attribution. I'm pretty sure that they don't even have an option to provide such specific attribution, which means that either they believe that the code copied from any one source is below the relevant threshold or they're just ignoring copyright.
That isn't to say that you should give to thunderbird, since they are currently disappointing you, but it is a bit of a vicious cycle.
The reason is the underlying Gecko engine being constantly yanked from under them — they rely on parts of Firefox's codebase and when that changes, they have to keep up, risk having security vulnerabilities or manually backport relevant security patches, in effect maintaining their own forked browser engine.
> *Look for PCs that indicate they are eligible for the free upgrade, or you can check with your retailer for more information.
Are they, though?
However, by that measure the original creator should also be compensated for their past work, given that they wrote about an order of magnitude more code than the second most prolific contributor, at least in the main babel repository.[0]
(I have no way to easily measure other equally important contributions, such as shepherding other contributors, dealing with issues and PRs, so I'm ignoring them.)
Apache 2.0 License.
If somebody told you that their preferred pronoun was "we", I doubt you'd use it.
> not every transgender person wants to be thrown into an "other" category with their pronouns
RMS's pronoun "perse" is gender-neutral (not non-gender).
The stance is IMO crazy, but he does have a point that using "they" as both singular and plural introduces ambiguity.
However, why is somebody holding these opinions a show-stopper?
One could argue that that's because in many cases somebody holding these opinions is a "dog whistle" for the person actually being a paedophile. In the case of RMS, though, we have no evidence that he actually is a paedophile, despite him being pretty thoroughly scrutinised over the years. We also know that he has a need to question everything and write about where he disagrees with society, which he presents in excruciating detail on his website, so it's not that he has some sort of fixation on this topic.
I'd argue that in an ideal society we should encourage thoughtfully heterodox people, since once in a while they'll invent something revolutionary like free software and copyleft, while them also sometimes holding some very weird opinions is not much of a cost.
In the non-ideal real world, once RMS came up with his revolutionary ideas, he probably should have stopped talking about his most fringe ideas, so his resignation as president of the FSF, for instance, had been sensible and over-due.
Does it? I think that the heuristics about an occupier being bad are less useful than usual. The territory was occupied just after both countries gained independence from the USSR, because the arbitrarily drawn borders did not reflect the ethnic composition of the countries and there were worries among the Armenians about ethnic cleansing by Azerbaijan.
Obviously, it's important historical context, but there's a huge amount of important historical context, such as the Armenian genocide, atrocities committed by both sides in the 1990s etc., which they also don't put front and centre, because it's simply not an article about the historical context.
If China invaded and occupied Taiwan, would you discount an article writing about the situation in Taiwan, just because it did not focus on the fact that officially Taiwan is not an independent country?
An issue is that R&D is a fixed cost rather than a variable cost, so determining how the R&D costs are to be split among AZ's customers is pretty hard and potentially prone to abuse. Are they to be split among all expected customers before the pandemic ends? All expected customers during the lifetime of the vaccine? During the lifetime of this family of vaccines?
Given that apparently it makes up the majority of the price, it's quite an important detail.
The Guardian claims that an official claimed that they were told by AZ that the discrepancy is due to European countries having paid for R&D, but anybody in the chain could have been lying.
[0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/22/south-africa-p...
[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-safric...
Your comment is a valid criticism of the Open Collective website (if you at all feel like it, please send it directly to them — see the bottom of the webpage), but it's not the fault of the "Open Web Docs" project. They probably have little more influence on the design of the website than somebody using indiegogo, patreon or kickstarter has on the respective platforms.
Assuming that the app can be reproducibly built, then yes, using an open-source app does give you more confidence that it's secure.
For a closed-source app, you can try to decompile it, which is far harder, or monitor its behaviour, which is far less reliable.
It connects with a tracker, which might be used to help distribute copyrighted works illegally, but also any other types of files.
It's possible I'm not getting your sarcasm.
The most iffy is the list of categories in utils/api_uploader_v2.py but there's no category that doesn't contain works out of copyright or under a license permitting redistribution, and even if that were not the case, that would still not be tantamount to being "preconfigured to find" anything in particular.
There's also the URL of the pirate site, but google also provides it, as do some comments here...
Approximately the same as would happen if the developer of a traditional Windows* application were hacked or sold out, except less serious, since they wouldn't have access to the underlying filesystem. It's not a non-existent risk, but it is a trade-off I and many other people want to be able to make. uBlock Origin being FOSS and popular considerably mitigates the risks. (Not to mention that I trust gorhill not to sell out...)
* or Linux (except that in Linux most software is distributed via repositories, which lessens the risks, somewhat; OTOH uBlock origin is also available via the repositories, for instance on Debian[0] and Ubuntu[1]). I'm not sure about sandboxing on MacOS.
[0] https://packages.debian.org/stretch/webext-ublock-origin
[1] https://packages.ubuntu.com/search?keywords=webext-ublock-or...
However, the move to Manifest V3 also involves curtailing the power of extensions, including those that I trust as much or more than the browser itself. I want uBlock origin to be able to intercept and filter requests according to the logic that gorhill deems most sensible rather than however Chromium wants it to be done, since I trust gorhill far more than Google (and possibly slightly more than even Mozilla). I don't think that any of the tiny extensions that I've written to scratch my own itch require any of the capabilities removed in Manifest V3, but if they did, I'd also want them to keep having them.
If you don't then you can append ?useskin=modern to each article URL. (You can do it automatically with a redirect extension.)
Alternatively you can inject the following CSS (e.g. with Stylus):
.mw-content-container {
max-width: none !important;
}
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences#mw-prefsec...
You can long-press the tabs icon on top, which is slightly more convenient. (No, it's not obvious.)
> Im about to start looking for another browser soon, would welcome suggestions! (Ability to run ublock is neccesity)
AFAICT the only other open-source android browser that supports ublock origin is Kiwi Browser.[0] It used to heavily lag behind upstream chromium, though — I don't know if that's changed.