elgfare

This whole explanation smells of "late capitalism". But even so, we have to judge companies ethically, because how else would new regulation be conceived of?

Uber says the majority of drivers don't want this, which I'd call bs on, but has anyone heard from actual drivers what they want?

There is no need for comparison when there is no need for improvement. He is content, he doesn't need anything else. I wish I was that content.

I had such trouble getting Ubuntu to run in 1920x1080 in my VM, which I found absolutely puzzling, but maybe this is because linux people find 16:9 passé.

The best we can do is to do everything we can. It might also be interesting to start burning biomass and capturing the CO2, which would be net negative.

Maybe it's viable for cement production as well.

I guess the low hanging fruit is to attach this to a power plant or some other CO2 emitting process.

I first thought they tested live sharks, which would mean they came from above, abducted them, probed ther eyes before releasing them.

Cool, I saw your site in the new page.

Do you have an example of what a "next action" could be?

Hands down, seeing people face to face. I have really discovered how much it means to me. I have been ambivalent about it because of social anxiety and low self esteem, but I have realized that in reality nothing else comes close in terms of raising my mood and giving me good feelings.

I'm also on an i5-2500K from 2012, I only upgraded the GPU so far. I recently ordered a new pc for roughly the same price as the one i built in 2012, curious to see how much of a difference I will notice day-to-day.

Not sure if there is any benefit to stripping back to raw radio. You can almost always build on top of other protocols to get a pipe that you can then build your protocol on.

That is, we trust institutions because we trust that the government has our backs if they screw us.

I see what you mean, and when it comes to institutions and government, we are also very trusting.

This rings extremely true for me. I live in Norway, which in my experience is significantly more trusting than most other places, and it's wonderful. We do have other transaction costs though, like a fear of "bothering" each other. Different problem, similar effect.

I guess it means less work for lawyers. The sarcastic reply is that lawyers don't need more money. The more serious reply is that the work a lawyer does doesn't increase the "value output" (I don't know the formal term) the same way that an engineer or researcher or teacher does. A lawyer, like an economist, helps grease the transactions of a society, but if society is already greased, the lawyer could be doing something directly "useful".

From the title, I was hoping for more "tangible" reasons. Most of the reasons given have to do with mitigating potential problems. Bad privacy, single point of failure, closed, censorship are purely theoretical problems for most people. Moreover, these are points that are harped over everytime mastodon is mentioned. It's not that they are not important, it's just not going to convince many people. I'm really curious: what are some user experience reasons to join?

Group A fails to address the fact that emotionally loaded speech severely dulls the rationality of most listeners.

Group B requires someone to take a stand on what the different types of speech are, how we recognize them, and how each should be handled, and also what the threshold of proof for untrue statements should be.

I think group A is ideal as long as the speech holds a certain level of rationality, but that limitation sort of moves it into group B since it's now subjective.

I think it boils down to: If we are unable to agree on even the simplest rules for our discourse there's no way to prevent the discourse from collapsing.

I'm aware that all morals are opinions and are dependent on an underlying subjective stance, and therefore the platforms should remain neutral in order to accommodate different stances. I'm arguing that in this case, since this is about stopping the dismantling of the structure of the laws themselves, it's a stance that it's ok for a platform to take since it's in some way the most fundamental common ground that we all need to share to function together.

Yes, but in a lot of ways, the laws of society are a sufficiently objective moral basis, since those are the rules we chose for ourselves. Undermining those is just bad in so many ways.

For those out of the loop like me, ECC does indeed stand for error correcting code. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECC_memory

Zephyr has a BLE stack maintained by Nordic.

The nrf53 is dual core with a dedicated network cpu.

Freemasons

So, basically people just wanted to hang out but now everyone thinks they want to take over the world.

My 9th grade English teacher read the Iliad to us, explaining words and phrases as he went along. It was an incredible experience. He also read Romeo and Juliet in the same way. I considered it a great gift to allow us to experience the truly great literature at that age, in a way that I think most of us could understand and appreciate.

Hopefully, firmware upgrade on embedded devices will get better and better, with things like IETF SUIT (https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/suit/about/) and MCUboot (https://github.com/mcu-tools/mcuboot)

Somehow this reminds me of myelin sheaths, which IIUC are insulating barriers that increase the rate of transmission in neurons.

I'm curious what sort of malicious code was distributed this way.

Bias can be reflected in which stats are reported at all. There's also the framing of the numbers and the conclusions stated or implied.

But it makes it so much easier to

- Statically check the code, since the static analysis tool knows for certain which value is the size and can check that you're using correctly.

- Initialize the size correctly, since you don't have to enter it twice, or more crucially, remember to change it twice (or create a #define in another part of the file, name it, and document it)

You also make an excellent point yourself about the meaning of 'size'. If this was standardized, it would be the same everywhere, minimizing the risk of ambiguity.

I totally agree that C shepherds you into pointers. I also think C shepherds you into writing everything from scratch. Most of all I think it's a self-perpetuating cycle of "there's no system for X (e.g. sized arrays, packaging system, classes) so everyone makes their own, and now all other code feels slightly incompatible with all other code."