In the age of distributed databases and the dark web and the block chain and federation surely we can figure out a way to archive media that doesn’t put people or organisations at risk of litigation

That limits and gatekeeps access to an enormous degree. The IA wants to be useful to everyone, not just the tiny fraction of the world population savvy enough to use the internet for more than opening a browser and a chat client.

don’t institutionalise the perpetration of rights violations?

Counterpoint: The perpetration of this kind of rights violation precisely needs to be normalized to the point of meaninglessness. Intellectual property can either go away top-down (which considering the way things went over the past century is never going to happen) or it can go away bottom up - it has to be flaunted and disregarded by everybody via continued large-scale disobedience.

Or, of course, it could just never go away.

What’s that got to do with anything? What does account age have to do with anything or are you just unnecessarily flexing to make yourself feel special?

That’s like some 30 year old going up to a 13 year old and flexing because of where they are in life. It’s just…pointless.

Look at it this way: You just entered a clubhouse. Nobody there knows you. You have not yet put any time or work into maintaining the club or into establishing your credentials and social status among the members. After entering, you immediately make a controversial (and arguably badly-researched) statement.

Would you not expect to be much less likely to get away with a stunt like this than a long-established club member?

I still don’t see the big deal, takes seconds to drag them into the bin and move on.

When you recall that, as a person who knows what a browser is, you’ll likely be in the global minority, you’ll realize it’s a tremendous deal.
And don’t even pretend that running an Android phone without a GooglePlay store is easy :P

There are far bigger problems that they should be going after - irreplaceable batteries, locked bootloader, lack of root access on a device you own would be three of the biggest ones.

You will find that all those issues, in the end, come down to the same anti-trust problem - single companies being allowed too much control and too much vertical integration. Regulating small issues away piecemeal is pointless when the question “Why should a single entity even be allowed to, at the same time, control OS development, browser development, package management gatekeeping and thousands of other different things?” looms in the background.

If users are too stupid/lazy to change defaults that’s on them.

Nothing of what’s written about in the article is “on the user”.

Japan’s antitrust watchdog has ordered Google to stop pressuring smartphone makers to promote its apps like Google Search and Chrome. (…) The recent order issued on Tuesday follows an investigation that began in October 2023. The JFTC found that Google required at least six Android phone makers to preinstall its search engine and Chrome browser, and show them on the home screen. These conditions were tied to licensing the Google Play Store, which is essential for selling Android phones in Japan. According to Nikkei Asia, around 80% of Android phones sold in Japan were affected.
Japan also said Google offered ad revenue-sharing deals to some manufacturers and telecom operators. In return, these companies agreed not to preinstall rival apps or search services. This, the watchdog said, reduced competition and limited user choice.

Global anti-trust efforts are simply not very strong and never have been. They make for boring political platforms and are constantly under attack by corporate actors.

Ideally no business should ever be allowed to grow to the point of being able to exert political influence at all let alone rival the power of small nations, but here we are.

Any rational enterprise will employ all and any anti-competitive practices that it can come up with - if it can get away with them. And the more influence the business exerts, the more it can get away with.

I don’t know how it works for this particular Cyberpunk crack.

Why would there need to be a crack in the first place? Cyberpunk is released DRM-free, isn’t it?

That’s an impressive project indeed.

And here all I can cynically think is “Great, finally a way to make the FP4 a bit more unwieldy and hard to hold with small hands, that had always been way too easy before!”

I am not sure if it will work out like this though. The amount of ads they are forcing down peoples throat is isane. Eventually it will make people consume less videos and with that less ads overall.

Sure, could be - but keep in mind that they have all the relevant usage data at hand. Any decrease in service popularity among users (or indeed any kind of user behavior) is immediately visible to them. They have the means to know exactly what annoyances the market will bear.

And considering that YouTube still holds a de-facto monopoly on video discoverability within the entire anglophone internet I feel like it’s safe to say that the market will likely bear a lot more annoyances :P

I found out Thangs locks print files and comments behind an account when I tried downloading my own files from a different device. I’ve decided to leave the platform and going back to my trusty old Thingiverse. I tried to find something new and better but maybe Thingiverse is just the place to be for now. New links below.

v.2: https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:6193644

v.3: https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:6193659

What’s the point of “leaving” or not using a platform like Thingiverse? Surely using Thingiverse and Thangs (and any other conceivable source) is objectively better than… just using a single platform, isn’t it?!

This is such a better use of their time and dollars versus improving their service to make it more attractive to customers.

Making their service more attractive to customers is precicesly what they’re trying to do.

It’s just that an advertising agency’s customers are not the folk who watch, read or hear the ads, it’s the folk who pay for the ads.

Thanks for humoring me!

Well, the info promotes options people can do to fight climate change. It says less children is the best option. Right now eco-activists blame and attack people for using cars and planes, they promote laws to restrict this kind of things. In few years they will blame attack mothers with 2 children and promote birth restrictions laws.

How many children to have - is a personal decision made considering many different reasons. What I find not acceptable is - promoting/advertising/pushing people to have less children because to protect climate. Like: “you have a 2 children? You are a shitty person killing our planet - much worse then a guy flying private jet!”

I always find it helpful to try and decouple everything from value judgements as best as possible - in that regard I find it hard to read any kind of “blame” or accusations of “being a shitty person” into that graphic. I mean, it’s just a fancy spreadsheet, isn’t it? “This kind of choice entails that kind of impact”.

Assuming that the data and the estimates themselves are reasonable and correct then it wouldn’t seem too far-fetched to accept that avoiding a transatlantic flight is a more impactful decision for one’s carbon footprint than life-long dutiful recycling. I mean at that point it’s just comparing numbers and it would seem to be rather objective and judgement-free to say “A person choosing to live their life without a car has made a bigger impact on their carbon footprint with that decision than than a person choosing to replace that car with a hybrid” or, conversely, “A person choosing to live their life with one fewer children has made a bigger impact on their carbon footprint with that decision than a person choosing to recycle” - wouldn’t it?

Or let’s do it the other way around: What would you change about that graphic to make it more acceptable in your eyes? Would you just leave out the last column or do something completely different with the data?

Agree. But promoting/pushing childfree as a responsible answer for a climat issue as the next option after carefree does not make sense either for the same reason.

I’m not sure I follow - are you saying that you would consider a family with two children to have made a less acceptable/responsible decision than a family with three children (or zero/one, one/two, … etc.)?
I mean if so then I certainly don’t want you to feel uncomfortable talking about it, it’s just that I’ve never encountered that kind of outlook before, so it’s a bit of an unexpected turn in the conversation for me. Could you elaborate on what you mean?

Why they stopped on “one less child”? I’m pretty sure that a suicide is the best thing a person can do to fight against climate change.

Advice doesn’t make much sense within some kind of shared ethics framework, otherwise you just end up with a reward function for some kind of rampaging AI.
That’s likely why this collection of personal choices doesn’t list “kill yourself” or “kill others” - because it doesn’t consider them to be acceptable personal choices. And surely neither do you.

Blacklist everything then whitelist the IPs you know you’ll be connecting from (work, cell phone, etc). I don’t connect from random places usually. If I need to then I use cellular. You might be better off with a VPN if you need to connect from random places.

I see, thanks!
Is there any concern with whitelisting a cellular CGNAT’s public IP? Presumably that would potentially whitelist thousands or tens of thousands of other mobile devices at once, wouldn’t it?

IP whitelisting

How do you do that? I understand how blocklisting would work but how does whitelisting work in practice? How can you know in advance from which IPs you will connect to your home network in the future? That just seems like a recipe for getting stranded in some hotel without a way into your network.

I’m a bit baffled that this hasn’t popped up yet: Sell them on eBay.
Mark them as broken goods/scrap and re-iterate that fact very clearly in the product description. Broken drives often sell for up to 1/3 of the value of a working one, no scamming needed.

I cannot tell you why that is, but my theory is that a lot of folk buy up broken drives in private sales in the hopes that the “broken”-diagnosis is just user error and that the drive is actually fine. Knowing my users that might actually be true in many cases.

Edit: I didn’t quite catch that you were not able to successfully overwrite your data. I guess that’s a point against selling it. Always encrypt your drives, that way you can always sell them when they break!

Unlimited* plans are always sold on the idea that a sizeable part of the user base aren’t going to use an actual unlimited amount of the resource.

Unless there is a contract regarding a fee over a period of time, there isn’t that much that users can do to compel a service to offer a service they no longer want to offer.

Absolutely! But I don’t think that’s the point of contention here. The problem is the “abuse” rhetoric, since it’s not just incorrect but disingenuous to basically claim that the users did anything wrong here. They’re imposing limits because they miscalculated how many heavy users they could handle.
Again, that’s a completely reasonable move, but framing it as anything but a miscalculation on their part is just a dick move.

easiest is just to get a newer intel i3 with iGPU.

transcodes everything and is very fast at it as well with quicksync. and uses a low amount of power.

Thanks for the suggestion!
I will keep it in mind but it’s not very practicable for me right now, unfortunately, as I’m not looking to replace my whole server setup, I was only looking for a possible upgrade path for the Jellyfin VM on my ESXi server via an empty pcie slot.

Do you get a public IP with Starlink?