Anomandaris

Obviously things cost money, you patronising jackass, but pining all your hopes on CEOs and the ultra-wealthy to cut in to their own profit margins for the sake of humanity makes you more braindead than I am. It’s scientific innovation that drives discovery, cost reduction, and economic growth, not profit-hoarding conglomerates.

A large portion of our discoveries and inventions in the past fifty years or more are building on top of innovations made during the 60s, 70s, and 80s by NASA’s launches. Electrical engineering, structural engineering, communications and data, materials sciences, all needed to be advanced for space travel. Handing this responsibility off to SpaceX just leads to all the data, discoveries, innovations, and corollaries being patented, trademarked, and locked away to make sure no competitor can take advantage of it.

Shell knew climate change was going to devastate the planet over 50 years ago. Did they capitalise on that opportunity to develop green and renewable energy first and completely dominate that market for the betterment of themselves and the planet? No. They locked down that information, spread misinformation for decades, and made short term profiteering decisions to advance their own individual careers. Now we’re watching the planet slowly burn. So sure, let’s trust the corporate pigs.

This is a horrible take. Absolutely awful, ultra-capitalist drivel. Why does every action or accomplishment have to be viewed through the lense of economic benefit? Not even holistic or utilitarian, just stakeholders and making the ultra-wealthy even wealthier… Who gives a fuck about space tourism? What the hell does that give us as a species?

The original comment about the importance of aerospace and space exploration is absolutely correct, but the idea that the end goal is space tourism is more than enough to make me turn against it also. The end goal is exploration, technological advancements, and a greater understanding of how our universe works. We should be taxing the ever-loving shit out of sociopaths like Musk and Bezos and feeding some of that in to NASA, and ESA, so scientists can make discoveries for us all, rather than businessmen making discoveries so they can exploit, gatekeep, and profit off it.

deleted by creator

It would be massively more simple, and more profitable to government, to simply levy a colossal tax on property owners who leave their rental properties empty for more than six months or so.

RedHat, CentOS, Debian, Ubuntu.

All are good choices.

If you honestly believe the standard, sterile, grandma-friendly, value-brand emojis typically available to mobile devices convey tone and response in the same way then nothing I could say would convince you otherwise.

That’s not to mention the fact that non-mobile devices typically have no emoji keyboard available.

We unironically need these Twitch/pepe emotes to spread further, they’re great for quickly and easily conveying a tone or emotion.

There’s a massive range of these emotes that we’re all missing out on… Madge

-50% ad revenue says otherwise

Like most things, it’s about balance. All changes to open source software must be approved by the community managing it, and if that community is lazy or poorly managed or simply too busy then there’s an opportunity for new vulnerabilities to be created, either accidentally or maliciously.

But for well managed software, as other people have said you can get more changes more frequently, more security as many people are evaluating the code base, and greater attention to what users want rather than what’s profitable. Whereas with closed source software there is a greater focus on profitability, and sometimes that leaves vulnerabilities open when development is rushed and/or vulnerabilities are not seen as important enough to justify the cost to fix, but sometimes that tendancy towards profitability can also ensure the product stays a market leader. Steam may be a good example of a good closed source product.

I wish someone would say that about me :(

Although it may very well be caused by Twitter running out of money, which would be corroborated by Twitter’s lack of payment to various other parties. Giving Musk three options: Use more of his own money, admit defeat and massively scale back Twitter’s functionality and availability, or try to scam money out of other people.

Clearly he’s not willing to spend his own money, or admit failure.

Nice, thanks, I didn’t know about this! I assumed the ads were just an unfortunate necessity to maintain the site, but you can definitely tell there’s a bigger difference when you compare the two.

Aside from email already being federated as others have said, there’s a site called PrivacyTools with lots of links for the other things you talked about and lots more.

Interestingly I had never seen this phrase until a few days ago, on another similar thread, and now it seem like everyone is saying it.

Baader-Lemmyhof?

That’s a reasonable response, but the other guy’s concerns are absolutely not meritless. Tech platforms demonstrating and offering up these kinds of currencies or tokens do explicitly talk about ideas such as limiting certain currencies from being spent on certain things, or enabling/disabling from a central authority.

China is already rolling out this type of currency albeit with limited success, and while I haven’t heard anything about the e-CNY being tied to their social credit system, or punishments being inflicted in the shape of limiting access to funds, it’s absolutely a possible option.

I think you do have to be careful here though. If you’re too permissive you allow bigotry, but if you’re too restrictive you cut off honest, good faith debate and create echo chamber silos where beliefs are never challenged.

Bigotry should never be accepted but that means non-discriminatory opinions, especially ones you disagree with, should be allowed.