Comment And now for something completely different (Score 1) 46
...it's
...it's
The obvious answer is to simply disconnect regions that impose internet-breaking restrictions. If a region believes the rest of the world is responsible for parenting their dumb children, and in particular they're willing to sue when someone else fails to live down to the standards they think their little sheltered idiots need to engage the world and that they're too incompetent to provision themselves, then merely politely tell them their entire region is insufficiently sophisticated to interact and pull their plug.
We really need a FOSS maintained "Gilead regions" IP block list, v4 and v6, for independent operators and national ISPs and DNS providers engaged to banlist those regions from interacting with the an internet that doesn't work for them. They have every right to decide for themselves, but not for anyone else.
FreeBSD powers my personal infrastructure and has for decades. It is easy to use, not bloated (too badly, though you now have to take steps to keep that damn Wayland out of a server, WTF, but you can with
Moving from SVN to git kinda sucked, but now it works well enough and gets the job done and keeps the Linux heads happy.
whut?
Time out, it kinda got ahead of us, everyone needs a break. Just unplug the whole internet and let NIST catch up. It's not safe to be connected without a current CVE database.
Yes!
We must build an absolute monopoly on inventions which is permanent and heritable even if by so doing retard the progress of science and the useful arts. Without legislative protection, innovation would be like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density in any point; and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement, or exclusive appropriation. Society must give a permanent exclusive right to the profits arising from them, lest they be denied by their nature the status of property.
Email is, by far, the best communications modality yet devised. I have never heard a remotely coherent argument against it but am inundated with endless marketing invective and paid articles decrying it and extolling the virtues of yet another short lived, idiotic alternative, inevitably proprietary and VC funded still in the burning OPM stage.
It is a transparently disingenuous hype machine desperately intent to lock up commercial ownership of private communications.
Don't breathe that crappy free air, try our UltraChat brand premium air! All the hip kids have switched, they all hate free air and get so much more done on UltraChat! If you were actually cool you'd already be breathing UltraChat Air, boomer. And your first 10,000 breaths are free*!!!
* $8/month after the first 10k up to 5 Gbreaths, contact your corporate sales executive to continue breathing after 5G.
Don't wait for your contact to "expire"
No seriously, you'll die. Pay up.
What makes a good text coms system:
Global interoperability
portability
adherence to open standards
Reliability
store & forward
Local storage and background sync
fast, indexed search
save draft and resume later
structured formatting
Organizational mechanisms like folders
centralized directory
What has all that and more? email. always has, always will. Chat is for children trying to hook up and well-suited to that level of complexity, but nothing more. I don't get how any company or team can be so flabbergastingly idiotic as to willingly cede control of their core intelligence to strategically misaligned scammers trying to lock it up for profit.
If you want a chat interface with the features of an email backend, try delta-chat. I'm not entirely happy with their PGP protocol, but there is some slow progress: https://support.delta.chat/t/a...
And redmine. I mean updating anything is a horror show, but redmine.
Companies suffering should band together and fund a FOSS tool that meets their needs. Or just set feature bounties for projects that are a near fit. Those fees would fund an awful lot of really great development by talented people and create a lasting legacy.
Facebook is broken, and it's broken by design.
These tiny patches they add on to correct their worst outrages are nothing but measures to avoid the regulation that is absolutely required to stop the dread that Facebook has become. The basic problem is that they keep optimizing for engagement, desperate to keep growing the beast, and that the most engaging content is everything that causes outrage. They know this problem, and they won't fix it because fixing it might limit their growth.
At this point, Facebook is little but a cancer on society.
I direct your attention to https://www.technologyreview.c... (Which Facebook seems to be ensuring doesn't show up in anyone's feed - you can post it there, but it'll receive zero engagement), and the Twitter thread that discusses how Facebook has been working on killing this story: https://twitter.com/glichfield...
I mean, I guess I can excuse your lack of reading ability - the truth is just glaring at you from the summary itself.
'Talking to a CNN anchor in late 2019 Joe Biden said, "You can't do what they can do on Facebook, and say anything at all, and not acknowledge when you know something is fundamentally not true. I just think it's all out of hand."'
'[...] New York Times interview from a year ago he said he wanted it "revoked immediately". '
The fact that you've been modded to +5 when spouting nonsense shown false in the very summary of the article you're responding to is however a rather damning indictment of Slashdot's user-run moderation system.
No line available at 300 baud.