I don’t get. Why would you want to do this? I understand to run standard os tools, but why? Just curl the page and use tools.
Also i wonder if there’s any kind of vulnerability that can be exploited somehow.
Maybe i’m not understanding though?
Can anyone explain it to me please?
It does sound interesting though.
Interesting… she’s worried these games are like width, but her solution is to find one of her own… ok?
It’s an interesting point she’s making, and while i agree that games can be tedious and do kind of align with a bs job, she can easily limit her kids playing those kinds of games without fear they won’t be able to eat or have shelter.
No one works a bs job because they want to, but because they need the money.
While games are a source of entertainment. So im not really sure the point she’s trying to make here, besides games bad. Yes, they can be bad, but as a parent it’s you’re responsibility to limit that then. And before any one asks, yes i’m a parent.
I’m someone asking a question. And if putting a comment on a post, that allows comments, is hijacking then you’re really not going to like the rest of the internet.
Folks really just can’t be civil on Lemmy apparently huh?
One would assume that a platform that is attempting to promote folks posting things and allows comments that we can have a discussion without attacking each other. But I guess not, huh?
Personally, I just gave up on c/worldnews. Yes, someone is posting in c/worldnews, yes, they’re from western sources, but how exactly is an article on climate change causing increases in bacterial infection “pro-imperialist propaganda”? If it’s science based, backed by a report by the CDC, then that’s science. Not once has the primary person posting attempted to influence the conversation on posting. When folks are responding to the articles, the person posting states something like they agree with the post or they disagree with the post.
The problem with fact checkers, if they too can be biased and a lot of world news is going to be difficult to verify.
I just had this conversation about things like Snopes and mediabiasfactchecker. I was just told they weren’t reputable sources, just because. There is almost no chain of trust with news sources it seems. At least not one that everyone will agree on, so what can we do?
If you block someone from posting, what’s to stop them from creating new accounts and getting around it?
If you go by the community up/down votes, same thing.
Sadly this is a fact of life on the internet.
One thing we can attempt to do is attempt to be civilized and let’s have an active discussion and not just “YOU’RE WRONG!” Ok… maybe I am wrong, let’s have a discussion as to WHY I’m wrong and where are the sources?
I don’t have an answer to this problem, so honestly I’m staying out of c/worldnews now, because it’s not worth it. I’ll just get my news elsewhere from Lemmy and that sucks, but if we’re not going to have real conversations then this site and technology will just devolve into the absolute cesspool like other places.
And that’s not to say all of other platforms are perfect or imperfect. There’s beauty and ugliness in everything. The technology isn’t implicitly good or evil. How we decide to use it is.
So can we just be grown ups and have real discussions or is this platform just going to turn into another awful place on the web? It’s up to us.
So for every single news article you completely research every facet of a company? You have way more patience than i do. But that probably is what it takes on the internet today.
I’d assume once you research a company though that you wouldn’t research it again, you just save yourself time and go based on your original research?
Or do you check up on each and everytime?
Do you have a list of ones you trust?
And internet search providers aren’t biased at all either, right?
There’s so much false info on the internet tout can’t trust any of it. None of them are regulated. in my experience at least snopes and mbfc try to back up their claims.
So you just randomly look up stuff and believe whatever hit is first?
Search engines are biased on how you phrase things.
So you have zero trustworthy sources you’re saying.
I’m legitemately asking you, for the fourth time, give me some sources.
I’m attempting to educate myself more, but you give zero information to help that, outside of critizing me, but yet you insist i’m the troll.
Ok.
So do you do all your own scientific research as well? Have you confirmed gravity? Or do you just trust that it’s real?
We have to assume some level of trust on some line, until proven otherwise.
Yes, what i’m doing is asking for actually information. If toy want to suggest alternatives, i’ll check them out. Instead you just want everyone to trust you on your word. And looking at your history you just want to live in your bubble and fight anyone that doesn’t agree with you.
So give us some alternatives.
Or ignore me and prove me right, and i sincerely do wish everyone, including you, a good life. And not in the sarcastic way you dismiss people.
Yes I do need more evidence then that. Snopes is known as a trustworthy source. So it makes sense for Facebook to hire them. Did Snopes compromise their integrity it did they try to do the job the best they can?
What you’re suggesting is basically on the level of an attorney decides to defend someone in a murder, even if that person didn’t commit it, that the attorney should also be charged on the murder if found guilty. That’s not how it works.
You can attempt to do good, even while working with someone awful. Guilt by association is draconian.
I don’t think Facebook is anything but an awful cesspool. But stating Snopes is just as bad without evidence, doesn’t help the conversation.
As I stated if you have other suggestions I’m open to getting them. Just stating “Nope, bad!” Without giving evidence, outside of affiliation, doesn’t help the conversation, nor does it direct folks to trustworthy sources.
If you have other suggestions in open to getting them, but I’m not sure how being a Facebook checker is a negative thing. Facebook needs LOTS of checking. Not a huge fan of Google Analytics, but I can hide myself from that stuff anyway, so also not a big deal really.
Basically they’re better than nothing.
I’ll also say that technology isn’t good or bad. Even if mastodon were to somehow so this, they’ll move somewhere else. Mastodon and Fediverse technologies well always have a dark side for those that are kicked out of somewhere. They’ll always five a place for their hate. That doesn’t make Mastodon bad or evil.
If the Mastodon devs were to attempt to force their views on everyone, that would be bad, because someone will have a view that doesn’t coincide with yours.
The best we can do is create the technology and block those users we don’t want to see. You getting into an out rage won’t change their mind. It’ll just prove their point. You can’t change their mind, that’s only something they can do. Let them echo their hate into themselves and maybe some will hear the echo and realize how awful it is and decide to leave if their own Accord.
If only there was a way to run your own server with your own rules and exclude those nodes you don’t like or something. Damn decentralized platforms being so centralized and out of our control!
If there’s content you don’t like you can block it.
If the node you’re on didn’t have the same views as you, get a new node or make a new node.
I don’t agree with any kind of racism, but just stating things like this, like you have no control, is just whining. You at least have options with Mastodon.
Social networks are always going to be a mixed bag, be part of the solution, not someone that just complains about the problem.
Wow…
Q. Will Audacity remain open source?
A. Yes. Audacity was, is, and always will be 100% open source and free in every sense.
The CLA also allows us to use the code in other products that may not be open source, which we intend to do at some point to support the continued development of Audacity. We can already do this with the code we write ourselves, but the CLA allows us to do it with our contributors’ code too. This is necessary because community code and internal code often get mixed in ways that are difficult to separate later on.
So, it’ll remain open source, but any code you contribute out of the goodness of your heart, we can take and do with it as we may… wtf…
“I guess in all those years with sysv,openrc,runit it simply didn’t show its shutdown slowness clearly, if it did not shutdown that fast. On FreeBSD stopping a desktop computer is always fast, never a delay and never a problem because of that. I guess it also had to do with the fact that I was playing with Ubuntu on a pi4, which comes with snap daemon and what not.”
I know nothing about runit or openrc, but I do know about sysv and upstart(which masquerades as sysv so most folks probably think they’re running sysv and really it’s upstart). sysv and upstart don’t manage the process the way that systemd does. It just runs a start script and walks away. So there’s no true tracking of if an application is misbehaving or not. 99/100 the script runs a command and puts it in the background, and then moves on so that other scripts can do their thing. If all init scripts would wait for every process to come down, then I would imagine we’d see a lot more of what systemd does, which is waiting on something to stop properly.
I feel like there’s a huge misconception about systemd, regardless of what folks think, it is NOT just an init system. upstart, sysv, are just init systems. systemd is a full management layer. As well as contrary belief, a LOT of what systemd does is all modular.
You don’t NEED systemd-logind or systemd-homed or systemd-networkd, again I work for Red Hat, we often don’t allow things in because they don’t pertain to us (looking at you systemd-homed). So the fact that your distro of choice DOES have this, means the devs made the decision that this systemd piece solves a problem for them. You do NOT need it.
Now, if you do not have systemd-logind, then yes, you’re going to be limited in what you can use. Gnome has decided to make a hard dependency on systemd-logind. Again though, is that systemd’s fault or Gnome’s?
It’s just code, if you don’t like it, don’t use it. If you have a problem with it, please report a bug so it can be fixed or so folks can understand how to use systemd or help the systemd devs understand use cases.
I will state that systemd source is a MASSIVE labyrinth and pisses me off endlessly, but it’s moving more towards like what the kernel is. But as you have kernel space and userspace, now there’s kind of a system management space.
Never understood how systemd, telling an application to stop, and then waiting on it to stop and it doesn’t, is a systemd problem. This is an application that isn’t shutting down properly or they unit done was configured incorrectly.
If I tell my car to turn off and when I turn the key of, the car keeps on rubbing, is that my fault or the car’s?
Also as for the container issues, a lot of these container platforms are built on top of systemd and leverage systemd, because it makes their jobs easier. The containers devs could decide to handle cgroups themselves, but instead they’ll push systemd to do things it wasn’t intended to do and then blame systemd.
I will say, I am biased. I work for Red Hat, primarily in systemd support and I with closely with the systemd devs. Is it perfect? Not at all. A lot of stuff is completely broken, but the devs are always willing to listen and try to make it better.
Peertube link:
@thelinuxexperiment@tilvids.com
Ubuntu Touch on the Pinephone - is this the best Linux mobile interface?
IDK who that is, but I agree 100%! Let’s not just stop at public money, public code, but let’s go with all science, engineering, etc, should be public.
That’s uplifting though. Thanks for the post.