In this context, ‘non-violent’ has a technical meaning. So we don’t need to play word games with it. As for putting people behind bars without no evidence, that’s not a thing that happens in rape or kidnapping cases. And in this case, the false accuser in the one going to prison.

Mozilla’s recent blog posts explicitly highlight that they are investing in ads for short-term revenue growth. So when they go on to remove the ToS statement about not selling user data, that suggests to me that their strategy is in fact to collect and sell user data.

Perhaps they aren’t doing that yet, but signs are pointing in that direction. So that does make me reluctant to share any data with them.

and yet somehow google made it worse. Not only are there more ads than ever before, but now it’s also a panopticon.

Making porting gog to linux a priority which has by far the smallest market share for computer gaming is the dumbest thing anyone in this thread is saying

Building a bridge across the river is totally stupid, because no one crosses that river to get to where they are going.

Building a house on that hill is dumb, because no one lives there.

Creating that new type of device is a waste of time, because no one has ever bought one like that.

…

You see the point, right? Not that I’m trying to give business advice. I’m just saying that these things aren’t necessarily as stupid as you seem to think.

Are you suggesting that this particular type of CP should be acceptable? (And suddenly “but I used AI” becomes a popular defence.)

I’ve been using OsmAnd for years, and offline maps has always been one of their main things.

Something bizarre is happening to media organizations that use ‘clicks’ as a core metric.

As someone who has taught many children how to use excel, the new AI features make using it easier but teaching and learning harder. A lot of stuff now happens automagically, and that makes it harder to see the reasons and structures and language of how it is meant to work. So doing basic stuff is now trivially easy, but learning to become competent enough to do more creative and advanced stuff is more difficult.

Thanks for the suggestion. I’ll check out Rnote sometime soon.

(As I said, I do like the writing & drawing features of xournal++; and so I’ve been doing a bit of basic file / folder organising with that already; but it certainly isn’t as easily browseable as OneNote.)

Part of my point is that a lot of everyday rules do break down at large scale. Like, ‘drink water’ is good advice - but a person can still die from drinking too much water. And having a few people go for a walk through a forest is nice, but having a million people go for a walk through a forest is bad. And using a couple of quotes from different sources to write an article for a website is good; but using thousands of quotes in an automated method doesn’t really feel like the same thing any more.

That’s what I’m saying. A person can’t physically read billions of books, or do the statistical work to put them together to create a new piece of work from them. And since a person cannot do that, no law or existing rule currently takes that possibility into account. So I don’t think we can really say that a person is ‘allowed to’ do that. Rather, it’s just an undefined area. A person simply cannot physically do it, and so the rules don’t have to consider it. On the other hand, computer systems can now do it. And so rather than pointing to old laws, we have to decide as a society whether we think that’s something we are ok with.

I don’t know what the ‘best’ answer is, but I do think we should at least stop to think about it carefully; because there are some clear downsides that need to be considered - and probably a lot of effects that aren’t as obvious which should also be considered!

Do you know someone who’s read a billion books and can write a new (trashy) book in 5 mins?

I’m very interested in OneNote alternatives. I’ve been using OneNote for longer than I’ve disliked Microsoft… and I still think it’s a good app. Pretty much the only thing I don’t like about OneNote is the increasingly close integration with Windows accounts. I’d rather my notes were not scanned and uploaded and processed by a US mega-corp…

Anyway, people keep suggesting stuff like Joplin. But that isn’t even vaguely close to OneNote in terms of stylus and inking. For me, inking is the main core feature. And so in terms of alternatives, xournal++ is a closer fit. (xournal++ has essentially no organisational structure for notes; but it is really great for inking.)

What I’d really like is basically the organisational structure of Joplin (or whatever other alternative) + the inking power of xournal++. And ideally being able to import my vast amounts of handwritten OneNote work! – But that last bit is probably too much to ask.

Hmm. I wonder if Aquaman is in the market for some old computers.

The Orange Box 2; featuring Half Life 3, Team Fortress 3, and Portal 3.

terrible choice of link. There was a stack of reporting from various tech-news sites and blogs; but you’ve given as the nazi site.

It really is a shitty take. Mozilla are essentially saying they depend on Google remaining a monopoly; and that we shouldn’t fight the bad guys because the bad guys might hurt us if we try.

The Mozilla blog post was all about the DOJ asking to end search-bar payments, and how this might hurt independent browser. But I saw no mention of the DOJ saying that Google must sell Chrome; which I think is very relevant to the discussion about browser dominance.

More and more I believe that Mozilla’s current leadership are acting in their own self interest, not for the public good.

The person you responded to just said that Trump is not the only problem, and pointed to the power of other elected members of the party. So when you say “you are so very wrong”, that seems to suggest that Trump is the only problem (since that was the main point being made); and your follow-up about the will of voters reads as a non sequitur.

Need more advertising in Firefox to keep pumping those exec salaries.

oh *snap*!

I think it’s a psychological thing.

Like, while thinking about what kind of phone we want - a small phone sounds pretty good. But when it comes time to buy it, we start comparing phones, and we see some small ones, and some slightly bigger ones, and some really big ones. We tend to go bigger than we’d originally intended because of psychological anchoring effects.

The slightly bigger phone is seen as a slightly better phone. “not too big” we think, as we compare it to some monsters; and the key stats such as screen resolution and battery capacity sound slightly better. So we tend to buy that bigger phone even if it isn’t what we actually thought we wanted.

[edit] I should say that I’m saying “we” in a totally generic way. I definitely don’t do this myself. I’ve literally only ever owned smartphone in my life, and it isn’t particularly big or flashy. I have an anti-phone attitude.