So I don't play that type of game. Has anyone here played those, and had the gambling feeling over these loot boxes? The summary is rather damning, but I'd like the opinion of an adult gamer.

Red. Frakking. Mine?

Sitting your moms basement looking at ASCII Art Porn and whining that the boobs are not open-source, written with Vi by other nerds does not qualify you as a UI engineer. And yet... these people wrote RedMine claiming that it is good because "ITS FREE!!!". Do you know what else is free? Syphilis. I don't want that either.

Seriously, Redmine is the ultimate expression of the concept of "Hack Job by Linux Nerds who think UI Design is for La-Di-Da College Types"

Redmine sucks donkeyballs.

It gets worse. The real lesson from AI?

Your job is so mindless and dumb that you can be replaced by a stupid statistical algorithm.

Linguistic drift and all that, being still in that awkward transitional stage. One of those things where expecting everyone to just jump into some new phrasing is a mighty big ask.

Bigoted scum like you lost the argument. In a Democratic Society, you get your way by winning the argument and then winning the vote. But your side didn't manage that. You lost, because the majority of people think your bigotry is laughable at best and should make you a pariah in any civilised Society.. And because your side lost the argument and the vote, they turned to underhanded tactics to try and get thier way anyway, undemocratically. But the civilised side isn't stupid and so noticed this underhanded tactic and voted it down. So your side lost again. And now, like the whiny little crybaby you are, you are bawling your eyes out about having lost and trying to misrepresent the facts of the case. You lost, get over it. Maybe try and join the civilised world instead of continuing to spread your bigotry and hatred, although I think that's unlikely. You'll just keep crying about how civilised people think you're a dickhead.

After looking further into this, it was indeed an amendment put in by bigots to try and wreck a piece of legislation they don't agree with but know they are in the minority on. The legislation was to cement recognition of trans women as women, and trans men as men. This amendment could have been used to bypass this because if passed, then if a trans man can get pregnant they would be a women not a man and this could then also be used to argue the vice-versa. It was an attempt to scupper a vote they were going to lose by making the legislation unworkable and was rejected on that basis.

Why would you need a regulation to say such a thing? What possible purpose could it serve? Are you suggesting that because they didn't vote to confirm this now men can get pregnant? Without knowing what the proposal actually was, or even if it exists outside some bigot's imagination, I suspect that this was part of some wider amendment designed to bake bigotry into regulation. They included that particular clause so that when it inevitsbly got voted down they could cite this to make it seem silly

I'm sure I'm not the only American that's willing to host and support The Free Press.

In America, UK has no power (since 1776)

Imagine the political possibilities if we hosted this on American soil on American servers.

Discord is about 10 years old now, so it canâ(TM)t quite come up yet that it would have accounts in use for 16 years. Still leaves the question about would this policy apply in such a case? If it does, that seems like it might imply Discord is treating the account as being used by someone other than the original owner. Which also raises questions.

Some have been wrong. Some have been delayed but eventually delivered. Some have been right. What most people seem to miss is that by setting insanely optimistic goals, it creates the possibility. Teams across his companies seem to be motivated to deliver more often than not, even if the optimistic deadlines slip. So why not set a push goal now and re-calibrate when physics or some other issue rises as they dig further into the problem?

Microsoft has progressively been making everything an instance of Chrome. They've seemingly altogether given up the notion of native platform rendering. The win32 api for native ui elements hasn't been touched in two decades. There have been a few failed attempts to move on from it like Siverlight, WinForms, UWP, LightSwitch, etc, but they never bothered to revisit their native UI library. So now everything is a Chrome instance.

My preference would be for them to focus on fast, native rendering again, maybe with a new 'win64 api'. But I'm not sure that talent or expertise exists at MSFT anymore.

I hope Bubba takes their lunch money for ransom and give them lots of slippery soap

... and I can assure you he is not mentally all there. They guy is pretty nuts to be honest.

I've noticed over the last eight months or so that a lot of large providers have made shifts in their service for email, and the services that are provided for email that kind of follow this path, in that suddenly it's become more expensive for them in some way and they typically either try to pass it on to customers or shift their operations around, etcetera, to make up for that, So I'm wondering and I'm asking flat out: The /. community please tell me what is going on with email that's making it so expensive to send outbound account status notifications so suddenly?

I haven't done anti-spam operations in a long time but it's weird because I'm getting signals that DKIM/DMARC is suddenly more expensive and I'm also getting signals that outbound email ops are suddenly expensive enough that It seems related, but I'm not sure what exactly is going on here. I wonder if this is just due to antispam operations getting so costly?

Can anybody else shed some light on this? Please?

What you're not understanding is that they want to roll KYC out everywhere because it's considered a security thing to know who you're dealing with.

Anonymous accounts are the biggest security problem most tech companies have; This is why accounts are specific to an individual and are not allowed to be for a family or a group of people. The idea that an account is owned by multiple people is flat out insane; It might be used by multiple people but for liability purposes it can only be owned by 1 person, Because they need somebody to blame. A company's rights are not kept unless they know exactly who is doing what at all times, It's just safer for the company that they never allow any kind of account that isn't validated as only belonging to a specific person.

I love the idea of anonymous Internet access but I don't believe that it will be something that will ever be protected or allowed in the future; once they start doing this stuff and make the claim that it's about protecting the children or whatever, every single website will have an age limit which means every single website will have some kind of requirement that they opt in to identity validation and therefore at that point the things that you do online will simply be tracked by that company for profit and so the issue there is your privacy will only be respected when respecting your privacy is profitable because it gives the company that has the data on you a Moat against the company that doesn't have that data on you.

The problem there is that only websites that can afford to do that kind of tracking will be allowed to exist and so you have a direct battle against the poor and the rich, you're effectively making the statement that unless you're rich enough to track every single user that creates an account with full KYC and age validation for every single account, You're not allowed to start a website that allows people to log in.

And that's wrong.

I don't consent to have my data bought and sold by people that I don't know about or didn't consent to be allowed to do so; And I certainly wouldn't want a potential business or website not allowed to exist simply because we were just too poor to be able to support the $100,000 fee for this kind of thing up front that is required to even get onboarded before we still have to then go burn through credits per authorization attempt... because yes I've attempted to look into this, and I see what the requirements are, and the monetary requirements that it imposes on startups are the same as What is needed to hire multiple FAANG experienced principal level engineer's salary for every year of operation.

This is just entrenched tech companies trying to make it so that startups can't compete with them, as part of overregulation and KYC rollouts.