Alt. Profile @Th4tGuyII
Part of me wishes that the oil would run out sooner to give governments more urgency to actually do something about our fossil fuel dependency, cause apparently the increasingly apparent effects of climate change just aren’t enough motivation.
The irony of the right wing insisting on jamming it to songs that mock or completely oppose their ideals by bands that would hate their guts is palpable
Don’t remind then that America isn’t the world.
Also, ~999M is a whole lot less than the ~8B population we have now, so that is veritably not true
You could be right about them recycling numbers already, but 330 million < 999 million, so that wouldn’t be why
I have no doubt Alphabet Google would try to delay any breakup as long as physically possible, but this would be a huge win against big tech if it went ahead.
It’d probably be quite the win for public privacy as well, as it’d decouple these widely used platforms from Google.
You telling me that a corrupt conman businessman with basically no morals is taking blatant quid pro quo bribes as part of his presidential campaign?? I can’t believe it! /s
Seriously though, it’s not a danger of him using the presidential seat for corrupt motives, it’s a certainty. The world got lucky last time that his shoddy handling of Covid basically kneecapped his plans, but even then he still did near irreversible damage to the executive branch in the form of the now also blatantly corrupt SCOTUS judges. Don’t give him a second chance.
As someone who has worked with academics, the more specialised the person, the less common sense they seem to hold onto.
As such, if this was outside their PhD specialisation, then it’d absolutely make sense that this wouldn’t occur to them.
So the profit cap has been removed and the non-profit has been kicked out of the control seat. Sounds like they’re taking off all the safeties in the name of money.
Goes to show the money always wins, and if AGI comes true, humanity will pay forfeit.
My first instinct is to say “No shit Sherlock”, of course people who get paid more for their projects can afford to contribute more time to them…
but I do understand that having empirical documented evidence of something, even of it should be common sense, is really important, cause common sense isn’t as common as people think it is (especially when a lot of people in power seem to quite intentionally lack it)
If these monoliths work as well practically as they do here in a small-scale test, then we might actually have a chance at minimising the damage done by unregulated release of PFAS, which would be good for all of us.
Having said that, I do fear that the rise of these “fix it in post” environmental solutions will be used by big bads to justify the continuation of bad environmental practices because “ThE sCiEnTiStS wIlL jUsT cLeAn It Up AfTeR”
Yeah. If you’re on a public forum accessible to anyone, which the whole fediverse is, then you should never assume privacy.
Honestly transparency in this regard would be better - they’re already visible to much of the community, so they might as well be visible to everyone.
To be fair, there’s a point to be made that someone who’s overly trigger-happy on dislike should be shamed for it. Just like you would be if you kept being snide to everyone in real life.
I agree that transparency would do much more good than harm, plus compared to the info that people already put in their profiles/comments, it’s not likely to make them anymore identifiable.
Votes should absolutely be public. They were on KBin, and it made people more civil for it because you could be shamed if you were dislike trolling or liking all of your own posts/comments to make them look better (which is something you actively have to do on here, unlike Reddit).
Given this place is pseudo-anonymous anyways, and people comment far more personal and identifiable info here anyways (which tbf you should be careful about), I think public votes would do much more good than harm.
Too many people end up in debt spirals with these BNPL companies because there’s no consistent safeguards against it, so we absolutely should be regulating them better. We shouldn’t be leaving financially vulnerable people to the wolves.
Wow a Republican with a spine, I didn’t think those existed anymore
Sounds great until you realise these rules, with respect to POWs, are broken so often that they’re barely worth the paper they’re written on.
As far as the companies go, their lack of resources is an entirely self-inflicted problem, because they’re won’t invest in increasing those resources, like more IT infrastructure and staff. It’s the same as many companies that keep terrible backups of their data (if any) when they’re not bound to by the law, because they simply don’t want to pay for it, even though it could very well save them from ruin.
The crowdstrike incident was as bad as it was exactly because loads of companies had their eggs in one basket. Those that didn’t recovered much quicker. Redundancy is the lesson to take from this that none of them will learn.
I think what @riskable@programming.dev was saying is you shouldn’t have multiple mission critical systems all using the same 3rd party services. Have a mix of at least two, so if one 3rd party service goes down not everything goes down with it
Elon Musk openly flouting the rules of the platform he owns to knowingly share misinformation to disparage a woman he doesn’t like…
Tell me Elon is a right wing shill without telling me he’s a right-wing shill
I’m always surprised by how many people would sooner rather run up their heating bill all winter than even contemplate putting on extra layers (or even just thicker/longer clothes).
I had a friend who would wear pyjama shorts the whole winter and always complain about the cold, as though putting on a dressing gown or just normal PJ pants wasn’t an option.
Like obviously you should use heating if you need it - don’t get risk hypothermia to save a buck - but I’ve never understood the rational behind people’s refusal to actually dress like it’s winter.