Not sure about better but I can add a step. Fire up Microsoft word, then write a macro which outputs a shortcut that launches Internet explorer with a URL that loads and local HTML page which after 1 second redirects to a .exe. then click open instead of save as. That only works with really old school internet explorer of course not the modern edge version.
Don’t think there is an ounce of principle in this either way. Toyota bet the farm on hybrids and hydrogen. Turns out EVs are the future, the one thing they bet would never happen. As a result they are now 10+ years behind everybody else in battery technology. If they pivoted and went 100% EV today, it would still be years before the models they start designing today make it to dealer showrooms. And here’s more before they made any kind of the per unit profit that current gas and hybrids do.
So they see laws like 100% EV by 2035 and they panic, because they aren’t ready to do that and probably aren’t going to be.
Thus, they try and stop EV mandates. And that gives them some unlikely allies, namely climate deniers.
It’s too bad that the company that made hybrids popular is now on the wrong side of history.
Bow tie for sure. I suggest raise the hat a little bit so you can see the eyes a bit better.
Of course it’s their choice. But I also think some people in some situations should recognize a broader responsibility. Because we get into a larger question of, what happens when the public square is privately owned?
With a website like joinfediverse, that domain becomes a primary resource for people looking to get into decentralized platforms. By not including something, the maintainer is not just making the choice for himself but for every new user who visits the site. That responsibility should be taken seriously and the choice not just made based on personal opinion.
Think of it this way, imagine I made a site called whoshouldIvotefor.com and it would ask you questions and then recommend a political candidate. Sounds like a good idea, right? Now what if I make it so the site always recommends a Republican candidate, and only justifies why the answers you gave to the questions indicate that vote? I’m certainly allowed to do that. Free speech and all. But it could be argued that I also have a responsibility to the voters who come to my site who don’t realize it is biased, in that I am pushing my personal opinions on them and causing them to make a decision that they wouldn’t have made if they had all the facts.
(Disclaimer- I’m not a Republican, I consider myself liberal-libertarian. I’m using that as an example.)
I am just saying that a site which sets itself up as an authoritative on ramp to the fediverse should try to be unbiased and not based on personal opinions of its editor.
Well, since you’ve vocally criticised the developers and they haven’t bothered changing their ways, wouldn’t you agree they deserve to be gatekept?
No. In fact, I strongly dislike that whole attitude of ‘do what I want or else I will cancel you’. I am not the arbiter of what is ultimately right and wrong and neither are you and neither is parent commenter.
I believe people have the right to make their own choice. And since Lemmy has significant user base and significant active discussion and thousands of communities, I think the users have the right to make that choice for themselves. Make them aware of the situation, make them aware of the potential downsides, make them aware that lemmy.ml is run by tankie assholes, maybe recommend some better instances, and let them choose for themselves.
That is why I like Lemmy and the fediverse as a concept. I can choose the instance that has the policies that I want. Among those policies is which other instances to defiederate from.
I agree 100% with this. The developers or the operators of lemmy.ml may be assholes, but the beauty of decentralization is I can simply not use their instance. I do not. Thus, while a warning label is necessary, I think more good is done by making people aware of the alternative to Reddit than by sweeping the whole thing under the rug.
As for user privacy, I’m not sure Lemmy is any worse than any other Fediverse app. There were a couple of bad things like being unable to delete a hosted image, but that has been fixed. Once again, warning label, not rug sweep.
The beauty of self hosting is most of it doesn’t actually require that much compute power. Thus, it’s a perfect use for hardware that is otherwise considered absolutely shit. That hardware would otherwise go in the trash. But use it to self host, and in most cases it’s idle most of the time so it doesn’t use much power anyway.
They wouldn’t obviously. Especially since VR content is significantly more expensive to develop. But that is an Apple problem to solve. If you want people to buy your $3,500 toy, you have to give them a reason to buy it. Personally if I was going to attract developers I would give them a real sweetheart deal, like for the first two years of the platform the developers keep 95% of the revenue. Yeah that means for 2 years I make no money on software but it also means at the end of two years there will be software to make money on. And make the whole thing bring dead easy to develop on. Have a whole bunch of tools to import existing 3D content or write games or whatever.
I tried one in the store. It’s an amazing experience, the augmented reality is done very well.
The problem is I don’t think there’s any content for it. If it could play 3D movies or games or something, that might be a reason to buy it. But for right now as far as I can tell the main reason to have one is to view 3D photos from an iPhone in actual 3D. And I’m sorry but that’s just not worth $3,500.
The other issue is the competition. Quest 3 is very close in terms of technology, not quite as good but close, and it’s 7x cheaper with a hell of a lot more content available.
Make it $1500 and release enough content that there’s a reason to buy it, and it’ll sell.
I would return that UPS and for about the same price or not too much more you could get a cyberpower unit that puts out a real sine wave. Obviously your server does not like Riello’s fake sine wave, so why not feed it the good stuff rather than trying to force it to eat garbage?
This is all well and good but I don’t see any changes happening and I don’t see any lessons being learned.
We voted for Biden, not Garland. Advisors can push him whatever way they want but at the end of the day it’s his call. And voters have been sharing every frustration for the last decade or two at getting presidents that don’t actually push the real reforms people want.
IMHO, in Biden’s place, The smart thing to do would have been go full Bulworth mode the second he dropped out. If he cut the bullshit and started calling everybody out he could endorse a damp paper bag as his successor and they’d get votes.
People voted for Trump because he is a reform candidate. He may not be a reform President (he wasn’t the first time) but he talks a lot of reform on the stump.
Hillary was not a reform candidate. Kamala was not a reform candidate. Both lost.
If there is a lesson to be learned here, it’s that DNC needs to jettison a lot of the old guard that have been the face of the party for the last 50 years. Get some young people with energy and new ideas and put them in charge.
After the United CEO shooting, it would have been a great time for Democrats to put the public option back on the table. That should never have been dropped from Obamacare. But there is enough sentiment in favor of it that they could probably get it through, or at the very least make Republicans pay in the court of public opinion for stopping it. Yet another wasted opportunity.
Yes exactly. If someone wants to block something, don’t make it a little procedural thing that can be forgotten. Make it a big deal. Put it on the news. Let them put their face on it.
That also means that Democrats would much less need 60 votes to push many policies. Most of what they would do can be done with 51, and real filibusters would block the really bad stuff.
I don’t believe either party has all the answers. I am disappointed that the GOP has gone down the rabbit hole of project 2025 and religious nuts, but there are some things they get right. Neither party deserves unchecked power.
I said get rid of the procedural filibuster. That’s where a Senator can say ‘I’m filibustering that bill’ and it can’t advance further until 60 Senators vote to end debate on the bill. The chamber then moves on to other business. That allows any Senator to mostly block any bill without consequence. That IMHO is bad.
The real filibuster- where a Senator will stand up for hours and read the phone book, that is essential to stop the worst bills. It should be used sparingly and it should be disruptive.
All those things would be worthy of a stand-up filibuster.
And, much like most Republicans over the last decade or two or maybe three, you are thinking about what’s good for your agenda in the short-term and not what’s good for the nation in the long-term.
The procedural filibuster is bad for the country. It’s bad for the country when Republicans have a majority, it’s bad for the country when Democrats have a majority.
And if the GOP tries to pass something awful, maybe one of our Democrats could grow a backbone and actually filibuster the damn thing.
Disagree. The only reason 60 votes are needed is because somebody will filibuster it. So grow a fucking backbone, and call out whichever asshole senator is refusing to fund the troops because he cares more about sticking it to transgender people. Don’t just vote for the thing, don’t focus on getting it passef no matter what, put your fucking foot down and name and shame. Point out that one person is holding up a spending bill worth hundreds of billions of dollars over an objection to a line item that probably costs $100k.
Or better, reform the filibuster. The filibuster is a good thing in concept. The procedural filibuster however means that it now takes 60 votes to pass something instead of 50 and there’s essentially no consequence for that. That was not the intent of the Framers.
If you want to filibuster something, you should have to get up there and read the phone book for hours. It should grind the government to a halt. It should be disruptive to everything, a measure used for only the worst bills.
Rules are rules of course. But when the car was approved for sale, approved as being rule following, and then retroactively after the fact, after it’s been out for years with literally millions of units on the road, suddenly it’s no good…, that doesn’t seem like fair enforcement to me.
Frequent software updates are part of having a Tesla. If the vehicle is unable to do a software update, then it is broken and would require service regardless of the recall.
Which IMHO just shows that the recall in the first place was just NHTSA unnecessarily flexing on them
Don’t think there is an ounce of principle in this either way. Toyota bet the farm on hybrids and hydrogen. Turns out EVs are the future, the one thing they bet would never happen. As a result they are now 10+ years behind everybody else in battery technology. If they pivoted and went 100% EV today, it would still be years before the models they start designing today make it to dealer showrooms. And here’s more before they made any kind of the per unit profit that current gas and hybrids do.
So they see laws like 100% EV by 2035 and they panic, because they aren’t ready to do that and probably aren’t going to be.
Thus, they try and stop EV mandates. And that gives them some unlikely allies, namely climate deniers.
It’s too bad that the company that made hybrids popular is now on the wrong side of history.