Ramps benefit all of us, they're not just for wheelchairs. Have you ever had to push around a moving cart or a stroller? You don't need a disability, you'll still really appreciate the ramps!

Perhaps the reason he has that kind of money is because the people that give it to him know that he doesn't have principles to begin with.

There's no single individual that made it happen, but no doubt that Linus and RMS were the two biggest. Bear in mind that there were lots of additional contributors to the kernel and GNU as well.

I also think Red Hat was also one of the biggest contributors to Linux's success. So many of the most important technologies that we use today came out of RH. I don't have a lot of love for them today, but their contributions in the '90s and '00s was immense.

I actually think that a large part of the reason why PCs are much better open platforms than mobiles is because there is no Red Hat of the mobile ecosystem. Google started it out with AOSP, but then closed it up when they monopolized the market. Makes you wonder if RH would have done the same if they had the same kind of success.

Sounds like an opportunist. Someone who just says what he needs to get his way, but has no guiding principles.

I can see how a message like this would sound coming from someone like Bernie Sanders, ie. high prices are squeezing regular people while oil companies bag the profit. Even if it's good for people to drive less from a climate perspective, it has to be done in a way that doesn't harm real people. But this guy just sounds like he's angling for political points with no concern for real issues. Would make a terrible president, so I guess he has high chances to become the Democratic nominee.

And they say AI doesn't cause brainrot... "Sorry you can’t get AI to work for you. Keep trying!" sounds like the kind of thing you would expect from someone who only outputs the highest quality of work, doesn't it?

I'm not saying all AI users are like this, and there are many smart developers that do use it effectively (like Torvalds), but there is definitely a loud group of AI cheerleaders that extremely careless and overconfident, while lacking any sense of self-criticism or oversight of what they say or do.

And by the way, you definitely can build simple web-apps in a day without AI. I was doing that in 2015 by just following the Django tutorial. It took me longer than a day because I tried to read the documentation and understand it. But if I put the same amount of effort that these low-effort AI users do, I could have easily just copy-pasted shit from the finished tutorial and been done in an hour with the same level of understanding (or lack thereof) that AI users have.

That's the difference between good and bad engineers - you have the tools in front of you, but can you make yourself a better engineer while you use them?

Speaking of which, you know what these AI tools do? They just go to github and copy off some project that already does what you want it to do. Anyone could do that before AI existed. Sure, it's definitely impressive that they can understand what you want to do and find the right result (usually), but you could do that ever since search engines were invented. AI is just the "I'm feeling lucky" button from Google from back when people had enough sense to be a little critical of the results they were looking at before they clicked it.

The best way to stop far-right parties is for non-far-right parties to get off their asses and start fixing the problems our society is facing. To be specific, prioritizing financial security and stability for regular people above all else - even the "economy".

Or to put it in simpler terms: we're fucked.

Article is light on details. I'm curious how they define what is "algorithm"-generated content and what isn't.

Ad personalization is hard to verify because it's all happening on the backend. What you see in a feed is much more visible, so maybe that will make it harder to work around. I haven't read much about how the legislation works and how it defines algorithms, but if it's something like, "only show me people I've subscribed to", then it would be pretty easy to verify whether they are showing that or not.

But in general, I agree. Big tech companies always find a way to work around this legislation. Enforcement is the issue, not the laws themselves.

Wait, isn't he supposed to be on the team that's trying to stop climate change?

Or does he think it's safe to let his backroom deal persona out into the public now?

The problem is, Android is not your OS, it's Google's OS. They decide how it works, not you, damn peasant!

(Ditto for Ios and Apple, probably)

Mullvad recommended Quad9 when they announced the shutdown. They said it's because they think Quad9 is doing a better job of it than they can, so it's a pretty serious recommendation.

Worth a read, it's not too long: https://mullvad.net/en/blog/shutting-down-our-public-encrypted-dns-servers-and-sponsoring-quad9-instead

Lemmy is like that to some extent. The fact that users have to pick an instance is, for a lot of people, too much overload and drives them away. But I see it as a filter. You have to have some absolute minimum baseline level of understanding and proficiency of the platform you're using. That's why the massive number of people on Facebook, etc. are oblivious to how they're being exploited by the platform, because they don't understand what it is or how it works.