Sad to hear about Brave. I like the idea.

The enshittening proceeds.

This puerile crap passes as +5 insightful on slashdot now.
Great.

Instead of just calling you a politically-motivated retard, I'll quote Mr Bill Clinton, who lobbied aggressively for and then signed the Helium Privatization Act in 1995:
"...We propose to cut $130 billion in spending by shrinking departments, extending our freeze on domestic spending, cutting 60 public housing programs down to 3, getting rid of over 100 programs we do not need, like the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Helium Reserve Program...."
(https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/address-before-joint-session-the-congress-the-state-the-union-11)

This is a reasonably literate and intelligent forum. Or it used to be.

Can we at LEAST recognize the blatant idiocy involved in presenting as equivalent:

"some things that have been declared harmless turned out to be harmful"
and
"things that are harmless will likely actually be harmful"

I don't know what retards will buy that* but it is such a very internet-flavored-argument it makes me recoil.

*that's actually a lie: I know *EXACTLY* what sort of retards will cheerfully gobble such nonsense up and likely chase off to reddit, tiktok, and twitter to spread it among their legions of co-retards.

You're not wrong, there is an aversion to change.

The reality too is that using "the one they're familiar with" is what gets work done.

Nobody wants to climb another fucking learning curve unless it ACTUALLY benefits them (and even then, there's a cost-benefit calculation to the time-to-payoff).
Microsoft - and more and more SAAS bullshit companies - keeps just *changing* shit for no reason (cf the 'start button in the middle of the bar' in Win11). MAYBE they add some teensy feature but imo 95%+ users could be using Word 2.0 and it would perfectly serve their daily needs.

So what users are seeing now is a constant fluffery of 'change for change's sake*". Is it surprising they are resistant?

*we all know it's just so MS can sell some more and CIOs KEEP ACCEPTING IT. Why? Honestly, if Corel just built a bulletproof basic-featured 1990 version of Wordperfect and sold it AS IS in totality today, no 'web awareness' no 'AI collab feature' no constant tweaky updates...hell, it might rise from the dead as a real competitor.

Who needs more than 3 min of porn?
(Excluding the time it took to download the video, in the "good old days" ofc)

Sounds like ff was carefully tuned to it's audience's needs.

Genuine question: what browser is better? I like Firefox but am frustrated by a lot of the 'features' you mention. That said, it's about as marginally functional - read: there are still a shitton of sites out there that "this doesn't work on FF, sorry!" (generally because "this" is a security risk, but that now includes things like tracing containers on Hapag Lloyd - which forever has worked with anything, or Followmyhealth, my medical providers dashboard/website, which "works" but doesn't accept passwords entered in FF so that's not much help).

Are there better browsers out there that are at least as functional as FF but better userwise? I tried Brave, like a lot about it but even LESS compatible. Zen has some nice ideas but even less finished (beta, afaik).

Only for contractors, and that's the choice you make becoming one.

I work for a large multinational and had a lovely package that didn't cost me a dime...until, oh yeah, it was President OBAMA who fucked that up by determining that nice health plans were now taxable in his Socialist Paradise Vision.

So of course, companies stopped offering them. Now that's government working for the people.

It appears to have everything to do with an impressive push for voter turnout in the 2nd round and getting former no-shows to the polls and they strongly (some will inevitably say suspiciously) toward Lula.

https://www.latintimes.com/bra...

"Brazil Set a Modern Confounding Democratic Record on Oct. 25 â" and Produced Polling Data No One Can Fully Explain
A 3-to-1 mobilization gap, four endorsements that backfired, two consecutive polling misfires, and a contested court order: how Brazil's 2026 runoff became a statistical event without precedent."

"Lula gained more than 10.3 million votes between the first round and the runoff while FlÃvio Bolsonaro added fewer than 3.8 million â" a mobilization gap approaching 3 to 1 that turned a 2.2-million-vote first-round deficit into a 4.4-million-vote win.

Four eliminated first-round candidates collectively worth more than five percentage points all endorsed FlÃvio before the runoff, yet the bulk of their voters appear to have broken toward Lula â" a transfer pattern that defies conventional political math and that analysts have no precedent to explain.

A last-minute two-hour voting extension ordered by a Supreme Court justice who previously served as Lula's personal defense attorney disrupted the count and handed FlÃvio's camp a potential legal argument; any formal challenge will go to a court whose current president was appointed by Jair Bolsonaro."

Yes, Reddiit-mods, let the hate flow through you: demonstrate AGAIN & AGAIN that this is a heavily, heavily moderated community where the mods are utterly unanswerable & unresponsive, and whatever they feel happens to be important today they'll whimsically change the rules and aggressively edit, purge, ban basically on their biorhythms.

Show your puny users how much power and authority you wield. Flex those mod-muscles!

Certainly the legal framework around AI is indeterminate. But without getting into Platonic hairsplitting, I think the 'cloud of concepts' that orbit the concept of OPEN SOURCE are best served by acknowledging and recognizing it, making it MORE transparent not banning the subject entirely (the point about linux is absolutely relevant).

Maybe it would be more reasonable to offer an "AI-gen" tag (if they don't already have one) and note in the FAQ the uncertain context of AI today, warning users that AI generated code / whatever may at some point be deemed NOT compliant with some or all of the 'open source' categories thus anything with that flag should be recognized as 'not clearly open source by the most rigorous definition today' or something?
. ...nah I'm kidding. Reasonability be damned. You kids go ahead and ban/block/delete away. Better the readers understand clearly upon whose sufferance they're posting.

...maybe this is a stupid question but ... who's going to determine if the AI gets it right, eventually?

Other AI?
I mean if AI is writing the reports and AI is evaluating the results and announcing "hey we solved it!'...who actually gives a shit at that point? Why would they honestly bother to tell us?

That seems a short route to Wall-E world where we're just sipping out SUPER GULP 1000s.

Ironic that the next story my feed is that Chief Economist at Apollo Global determines net benefit so far of all the AI investment and hype is....zero.*
https://slashdot.org/story/26/...

*in my experience, that may be charitable.

Why would they bother?

Why bother using NASA a civilian, largely open space agency when they could use y'know, the actual, specific, designed-for-task military space agencies that were designed, structured, and staffed PRECISELY for secretive military projects? Like DARPA, the Space Force, or the Dept of Defense programs.

I'm not saying the US doesn't have secret space launches, OBVIOUSLY they do.
What I'm mocking is the absolutely ridiculous assertion that the Chinese program is "open" to any degree, except very-calculated revelations...you know, like a military based program. From the bottom to the top. The ENTIRE Chinese program is purely secret, except for the shit they're trying to manipulate you with.

I get it, the concept of a major government program that's not secretive has to be incomprehensible to Chinese.

Obviously in 2026 most of the posts are going to be about how stupid Trump is just making meaningless goals for his own ego.

To be clear, he absolutely is.

Then again, I would point out that it seems pretty common that every president since the 1970s* has seen fit in the latter stages of their presidency to "talk big" on space commitments ... and then proceed to fund none of them.
Until I actually SEE $50bn flowing into NASA or space investment, I take ANY presidential assertions about expanding space programs as what they are: publicity bullshit.

*In fact the only one I can think of that didn't was Biden, but he was basically non compos mentis the last 12+ months anyway.

OK, OK we'll let Xi know you're earning your paycheck today.

The chinese space program is a fundamentally MILITARY program and thus its budgets, priorities, and developments are secret UNLESS there is deemed a value to public revelation.
The Chinese routinely withhold basic data that is generally shared across space agencies globally such as expected precise trajectories of vehicles and discarded stages.

Project 921, Shenlong, Or perhaps the 2007 ASAT test that was COMPLETELY unannounced and blew what, 3000+ of orbital debris?

Do you know what those TJS "communication" satellites are doing migrating into specific geostrategic orbits and then suddenly adjusting to park next to US or Euro satellites?

How's Yang Lewei feeling today?

https://undark.org/2019/01/29/...

What's chinese for "shut the fuck up, comrade"? I'm pretty sure you know it.

... But my request to the IT security mavens would be to extend your rigor beyond the employees to the programs that directly contradict your rules themselves.

I am told strictly: NEVER click on a blind link, yet I get constant emails from departments - including IT! - that are LINKS to training videos, educational resources, mandatory bullshit that when if don't click on it, I get stern warnings that I'm not doing mandatory things. (Oh, and all external email urls are replaced with unparseable 200-character strings that supposedly route the link through "URL defense" or some such.)

Or how about all the consultants? I work for an EU multinational and we have at least 3 REGULATORY-required systems that I have to log into to comply with EU bureaucracy that are myCompany.kpmg.com or whatever - and then I'm supposed to give that EXTERNAL pop-up my *corporate* user and password while it authenticates through our corporate cellphones.

I'm reasonably savvy, I believe, but when policy & security rules contradict, which am I supposed to follow? I can tell you that corporate IT doesn't appreciate being shown it's own use of blind links.

Absurd generalizations? Wut?

On what basis? It's unquestionable that the political left in the US has both:
- fought nuclear tooth and nail since the 1970s
- is clearly the most concerned (panty-wetting fear in other words) with climate change.

There is no sane person that can dispute those assertions, gaslighter.

"ignoring the fact that your tech isn't actually the only fossil fuel alternative out there" I said LITERALLY NOTHING about that. Nothing. Are you asserting that expanded nuclear WOULDN'T have reduced hydrocarbon emissions substantially, or... are you just afraid to admit that?

I think wind and solar are great; they weren't meaningfully part of the conversation 45 years ago, which is what I rather specifically referenced.

I feel like you might not be getting enough oxygen. I made a single irrefutable assertion and you go off on irrelevancies as if they matter.