Yep, that’s textbook big tech strategy: -Build up the hype -Get the product out there, make sure as many orgs and people start using it as possible. Make it free or sell at loss if necessary -Oh yes, we broke a few laws for this. If we don’t get a waiver, we’ll have to close the service for everyone, do you realize the impact?
That’s Facebook on privacy, Uber on workers rights, etc. Now N+1th: OpenAI on copyright.
To summarize: they had a happy life until a terrorist group took them during a massacre.
Then they lived a short horrible life in the hands of their takers, while there is a war outside where one side claim to fight to liberate them without actually negociating their release and the other claims to use them as hostages while not really negociating their release either.
And somewhat, they end up dead because let’s be real: neither side gave a f*ck about them.
You wish. Orban controls all the media there now. You can be sure the narrative is “Ukraine is just punishing them unfairly for calling for a ceasefire and negociations” or anothe nice story that will make them look bad.
I’m responding to
Meaning all Israeli civilians that ever served in the IDF suddenly count as military targets.
If you do what “they” do as a way to retaliate, are you any different from “them”? We need to be better than that.
At last constant surveillance is deemed a problem, which is why ultra-rich have their privacy protected, while you, peons, keep being monitored.
That’s why you get “don’t put living animals in the microwave oven” in the instructions.
If Tesla didn’t explicitely wrote “don’t put your f***ing finger in the way on purpose after multiple attempts to close it!” he may have a chance.
He will plead a trauma from the loss of trust in his beloved car brand and the credibility damage on his Youtube channel and ask for M$.
They’re not “defeated”. They got exactly what they wanted. People leaving without having to lay them off through attrition.
Now that they think they have “right-sized” their workforce at no cost, they nicely offer to concede hybrid working to keep the rest of their employees.
Mozilla downsizes as it refocuses on Firefox and AI drops multiple products and layoff 60 so that its current budget can accomodate the stratospheric compensation of its new CEO.
What’s interesting here is they no longer need to hack and crack devices through loopholes and backdoors schemes.
All the data they need are already collected by private corporations with the pro-active collaboratron of the users themselves (“Click here to agree to the terms and conditions”).
I use to say “all extremes call for their opposite”. Since almost no information ever transpires about this whole scandal, the opposite is to release all the names to the public. It was to be expected. If we were trusting the justice system, this would seem inappropriate. But we have what we have, and making the whole list public is the only guarantee we have that not one of the “bad” guy can escape public’s attention. That of course, is valid only if the list is comprehensive and some names have not already been taken out.
It is indeed unfortunate that a lot of people who didn’t deserve and didn’t want any bad attention will get some.
I’m not saying I agree with the move. I’m saying it was to be expected.
[Edit made: grammar & missing words]
Nuclear plants consist mainly of a shitton of concrete (and only the best sort is good enough). The production of that concrete causes a terrible amount of carbon emissions upfront.
Actually, if you compare them to solar or wind at equivalent service, it’s not that straightforward:
Renewables installed capacity is nowhere close to their actual production, nuclear can produce its nominal capacity in a very steady way.
Wind turbines also need a lot of concrete, and much more metal for equivalent output. Solar panels need a lot of metals.
Renewables need a backup source to manage their intermittency. It’s most often batteries and fossil plants these days. I don’t think I need to comment on fossil plants, but batteries production also has a very significant carbon emission budget, and is most often not included in comparisons. Besides, you need to charge the batteries, that’s even more capacity required to get on par with the nuclear plant.
With all of these in consideration, IPCC includes nuclear power along with solar and wind as a way to reduce energy emissions.
Scientists have not been hyperbolic. If anything, so far, they’ve been very cautious abut their statements.
I still remember reading headlines about “likelihood of global warming” then “probably caused by human activities” because 90% level of confidence is not enough, you need more data until you can reach 95% or 98% confidence before boldly writng “most probably”.
But in their “probably” they predicted we would see more floods, droughts, violent storms, all of these happening one after the other causing devastation.
And Ô surprise: we see floods, droughts and storms following each other and causing devastation. Yet our leaders will claim “no one could have predicted all of that would happen at once!”.
Now they start telling us our civilization could collapse (“could” must be what? 75% confidence level???)
We’re going to spend 20-25 years claiming they exagerate, another 20-25 years saying “well, they maybe right, but we can’t change things too fast because that would be unreasonable and the people would not accept it”.
By the time, we will start reading articles stating no matter what we do now, we can only push out the end a bit, but we’re doomed. And the first reactions will be “those damned scientists always exagerate and use hyperboles”.
We also had decades to prevent climate change from happening and look how well we tackle it now.
I’m confident we’ll have a plan to prevent that collapse that’s due within 100 years, but to keep it reasonable, its execution will be spread over 100 years, and we think about starting in 80 years providing everything goes well in the meantime.
Chill, you can see it’s all taken care of!
Not going to happen. They charge such an insanely high premium vs real cost for a very primitive messaging system, they’re not letting that go!
“Collapse” meaning what, exactly? Do you mean run out of storage from the volume of content, or that processing all the messages is too taxing?
Years back, I setup a Synapse’s server on my personal server (Yunohost). At some point, I joined the “big” Matrix room. Bad idea: RAM and CPU usage went through the roof. I had to kill the server but even that took forever as the system was struggling with the load.
But don’t just take my words for it:
https://github.com/matrix-org/synapse/issues/7339
Last comment is from less than one year ago. I was told things should be better with newer servers (Dendrite, Conduit, etc.), but I’ve not tried these yet. They’re still in development.
How does it scale differently than Matrix?
The Matrix protocol is a replication system: your server will have to process all events in the room one or more users attend(s) to. There is a benefit to this: you can’t shut down a room by shutting down any server: all the other ones are just as “primary” as the original. Drawback: your humble personal server is now on the hook.
XMPP rooms are more conventional: a room is located on one server. That’s an “old” model, but it scales.
https://www.ejabberd.im/benchmark/index.html
That’s for the host. For other attendees, it’s much lower.
I don’t think I atteld any public room out there with 3k users, so I can’t report my first hand experience, this is the best I found. But I never had to check for load issue on a small server (running Metronome and many more services).
Out of curiosity, why do you say this?
I don’t use the Fediverse the way I engage with individual people. If I want a closer relation with someone, I don’t want to be bound to yet-another-messenging system, let alone on multiple accounts
And another reason is I may not want to be bothered by people I don’t know, regardless how much I could appreciate reading and/or exchanging with them in the Fediverse.
Ignoring or declining requests from strangers can leave a lot to interpretation and then frustration. Remove the button and no one is tempted to press it the be disappointed with the outcome. Less drama.
And that’s only considering well intended people.
But these are my humble 2cents.
By the time countries that could have built nuclear power plants would complete them, they will have collectively burnt enough coal and gas to doom humankind.
So: indeed, the world leaders didn’t try seriously.
I think it’s worse than that. We humans are inherently selfish and self-preserving.
People who live far away from any coal mines do not feel threatened by coal, because it will not impact them directly (besides fu**ing up the planet, of course, but that’s another issue humans have with big pictures and long term effect correlation to present small scale actions).
But most people can’t tell where a nuclear plant can be built, so it could be close enough to expose them to a risk of disaster?
Therefore: “Nuclear is more dangerous than coal (for my personal case)”
French here. If you learn in Belgium or Switzerland, they have “septante” and “nonante” for 70 and 90.
It’s for sure more intuitive, but you have to admit that saying “four-twenty-twelve” (non-french speakers: that’s literal translation for 92) is sooooo cool!
So you admit that Israel just carried out a terrorist attack in Lebanon? Or is bombing and killing citizens is terrorism when “they” do it, not when “we” do it?