> MacOS Sonoma 14.4.1.

Running Ventura 13.3.1 here. Perhaps that's it.

Thanks. I'll consider upgrading after I surf the "bugs in Sonoma" stuff.

So what that he encouraged or developed something, he is not the person who had actual access to this information, he never worked for any agency in USA where he would have to promise not to disclose information, to him (or anyone who doesn't work for such agencies) status of any 'secret' information is completely irrelevant, as it should be.

For example, if I egged on some general to disclose top secret information about some project and then he did disclose it, it would be on the general, not on me or anyone who encouraged him. HE IS THE ONE WHO PROMISED NOT TO DISCLOSE IT NO MATTER WHAT, not me, not anyone else.

I am not a 'right wing', I am not a 'left wing', I am a libertarian, anarcho capitalist, it puts me completely outside of what is considered to be normal politics in the USA by the way and I say that Assange has done nothing wrong at all and he is being terrorized because he embarrassed people who have power.

*this* is what "proves" it? Not the kidnappings, the torture, the murders? )

Yeah, you don't understand what will actually happen. What will actually happen is just more terrorism by the government that is already terrorist in nature. Kadyrov is a murderer, torturer, terrorist, his fame to claim was that he murdered his first russian at the age of 16. Today he routinely murders anyone who opposes his rule in any way, real or imaginary. His son kidnaps and beats a kid who posts something online that Kadyrov finds offensive. People routinely disappear, never to be seen again. People get tortured for anything that Kadyrov doesn't like.

At the same time Chechnia's economy only exists because putin provides Chechnia with billions of dollars every year from the russian budget.

You don't understand what is actually happening there. They don't care about law or whatever, if they hear something they don't like, you'll disappear and be raped and tortured and killed and that's about it. This entire thing about the music is really nothing at all, it just means that if someone *hears* music that is not Chechen they will report you and you will be gone.

Oh, the story has one good function. It points up how in isolation, such metrics are garbage.

Otherwise.... what you said.

> There's also the Text Size slider under the Accessibility control panel.

There is no text size slider under accessibility on my machine (4k monitor, M1 Studio Ultra.)

What works, sort of, is to select the desktop then right click (or control left click), select "Show View Options" from the context menu, and then in there, select a text size from the drop down. You can also do this in the context of any finder window.

However, maximum selectable text size is 16pts — which is very small on a 4k display. As an "accessibility" setting, it's laughable. Which is perhaps why it's not under accessibility.

I have been using a free app from the Mac app store, "Loupe", which provides a comprehensive zoom capability much more convenient than Apple's "Zoom." It's not as good as actual reasonable control over system fonts would be, but it's better than being stuck with 16pt fonts.

You are correct. What Canada needs is a 3d printed AI government, which would be a vast improvement over Trudeau.

XP64 here. Same philosophy. Block the garbage, don't be stupid, glory in my lack of visitors, and remember that attack vectors are mostly discovered by reverse-engineering the patches. No patches, way fewer clues.

Whatever small risks are well offset by an OS that doesn't continually make me long to reach through my monitor and throttle a UI developer.

1st of April was 2 days ago, was there an editing delay? In any case, there is only 1 Matrix movie, it was released in 1999 and I went to watch it in the theater 7 times. I have heard rumors about sequels but only that, they don't exist, whatever exists is not the Matrix, to make a movie like that one needs balls...

Is it online somewhere?

I have not shared it with the world, which I think is what you're asking. Nor do I plan to, at least anytime in the near future. This reduces the attack surface and the support loading.

Otherwise, yes, it's online — it's a networking WAN application bringing together people from widely disparate locations.

The real question is where will everyone go now that Discord is enshittified?

After putting up with Slack... slacking... for a while, Ryver ignoring bugs and getting worse over time, I wrote my own system from scratch. No ads, no randos, no spam, no cost. I am running independent family and business instances.

It's got a decent set of features, including a broad range of text formatting (it does _x_ and *x* and emoji :) markdown-like formatting too, but that's just for the comfort of our oldies), audio/video media, wide image support, file and image user libraries, various carefully designed bots, a full range of emojis, post previewing, search, and an integrated to-do system.

Sometimes, if you can, you just have to say "nope" and put your nose to the grindstone a bit.

I wanted a weekend driver and got myself a 2014 Boxster, no way in hell that would have been an automatic, that car is for fun and has nothing to do with any 'retro' crap. I wouldn't be caught dead driving an EV though.

I wish I were rich and had a huge cock. I got over it. I didn't get upset at every display of ludicrous wealth and every guy with a bulge in his pants running down his leg.

Well, uh, you're clearly... sane.

There are lots of non-pretty people who dislike that more-pretty people can make an easy living by marrying wealthy partners.

There are lots of non-athletic people who dislike that more-athletic people can make an easy and wealthy living playing sports. Should we then ban the use of photos of athlete's faces?

There are lots of people who can't act and/or aren't good-looking that dislike that actors can make an easy and wealthy living playing roles. Should we then ban the use of photos of actor's faces? Should I go on? Models? Politicians? Firemen? Cats ?

Who will protect our feline friends from the outrageous exploitation of the fact that they are cuter than almost any human who ever lived?

I mean, honey, you may be cute, but cats have you beaten like a grievously dusty rug in that department.

The entire trend of "oh no, can't see / say / look at / admire / leverage" [a photo of a face] is absurd, and would actually be funny if it wasn't so outrageously wrongheaded.

Imagine a big lab where male researchers put playboy pictures on the wall.

That's not even a remotely reasonable take or example for what's happening here. This is a woman's face . It's a "Playboy picture" only in the sense that yes, it appeared in Playboy. It's not a nude. Pictures of, just for instance, Peter Sellers and Steve Martin have also appeared in Playboy. Should we now ban crops of these gentlemen's faces from those photos from appearing in an image processing example? I mean, seriously. It's puerile. Stupid. Regressive. Ridiculous.

Do you think that is professional ?

If a person's face, even, OMG, a handsome man or beautiful woman or other, should be used for an image processing example? Yes. Absolutely. 100%. Is it professional? Yes. Absolutely. 100%. I'm not in the least offended by the idea, nor should I be. It's a picture of a face. As for beauty, again, not offended regardless: male, female, trans, androgynous.

Do you think female researchers would feel comfortable working there ?

With pictures of people's faces on the wall? Even, OMG, women's faces? Well, if they don't, they need some therapy. What they don't need is for the walls to be sanitized so they can pretend that good-looking people don't exist, aren't interesting to others, and are somehow offensive in and of themselves.

What about people who fear cats? Should we then ban all pictures of cat's faces from lab walls and studies? How far do you want to take this? What about agoraphobics? Would you have us ban pictures of the outdoors from lab walls and studies? What about amathophobics? Should all labs have privacy walls so no one sees powders on the bench? What about, OMG, a picture of a pile of powder on the wall? JFC, call the Powder Police immediately.

Look, if you — or whomever — don't want to appear in Playboy or some other publication, I'm 100% behind you. Don't. Don't sign a contract that gives them rights to any photos. As for what other consenting adults have chosen to do, just fuck off, please. The only one in need of your take is you. As soon as you start telling me what I can do with a picture of someone's face, presuming copyright issues are squared away, I'm going tell you to fuck right off.

And what is triggering you ? Are you afraid they're going to come for your porn ?

Quite aside from the neurotic absurdity of the anti-adult-porn movement, no, this is something else entirely. This is moving normal things into the realm of moral panics. It's a bad thing. Entirely. On its own.

Trump and his american taliban allies are the ones you should be afraid of.

I am about as anti-regressive and anti-Trump as you can get. Lefter-than-left in almost all social and economic aspects, conservative only where it seems to me to be logical to conserve already-achieved progress. An outlook that includes conserving the achievements of separating personal liberties from absurd moralizations insofar as we have managed that thus far.

The problem here, what makes it worthy of comment, is that this particular moral panic in-a-teacup is straight-up regressive.