In another post you’re actively looking at purchasing GPS systems. The satellites you’re sending info to are not available to dissect and I highly doubt the firmware of the devices you’re looking at is publicly available much less libre. Your trolling is not internally consistent so it’s clear you don’t have any clue what you’re on about. Good luck with that.

The claim is that audio and video are E2EE. I’m not sure how you’re unable to disprove that using the linked code, audit report, and COTS debugging tools. Can you expand on that? I see a lot of FUD without anything more than “they’re not libre” which, again, doesn’t do a great job of selling your point.

Interesting. I was able to access the linked whitepaper and repositories without trouble and the 3rd party stuff too. Do you have local config preventing you from downloading the source code to review?

While I can respect your distaste for non-libre software, you’ll need to back up the malware claim. There are real security concerns out there in common non-libre; labeling things that are not libre as malware solely because they are not libre muddies the waters and makes your message much less palatable.

This is complicated to unravel and has lots of similarities to the Tri-State Crematory Scandal.

Who owns a dead body? Does the state? Does the family? Take religion out of the picture for a few minutes as well so we can properly separate church and state. Someone dies without (available at that moment) relatives or a will defining what happens with the body. Alternatively someone dies and has not actually paid for the stuff stipulated in their will and does not have the resources to do so. What should happen? Something possibly like, in order,

• The family owns the body
• The facility where the person died owns the dead body
• The state owns the body if those fall through

Dead bodies can’t just sit around. They can cause serious health and environmental problems if not properly disposed of, so something has to be done. Remember, we’ve set aside religion, so a dead body is literally just a resource. It can be turned into cremains, it can be buried, or it can be sold for various uses. What should the state regulate here? What’s wrong with the state turning a dead body into some money? How much responsibility do families have in respecting last wishes? How much time and effort should the state put into investigating those? Do dead bodies really matter? How much land are we willing to turn over to cemeteries today? In ten years? In one hundred years?

Now if you bore with me this long and agree that dead bodies can be sold, I also strongly feel like there should be compensation to these families with interest for that shit. If you steal my resources and don’t tell me, the state already requires repayment. That’s what should happen here. It gets murkier once you add religion back in because you can’t really undo a lot of these things.

Dallas County is doing something wrong. But it’s way more complicated underneath the hood than normal Texas government shenanigans.

The article explains why this is risky. Were I in possession of a bionic limb, I personally couldn’t afford to replace it so it wouldn’t be worth the risk.

Once companies have branded their products, tidily and permanently painting over or erasing the logos can be challenging and expensive. Generally, a clinician will offer to customize a limb’s socket (the part that covers the residual limb). But many prosthetics techs are hesitant to alter bionic parts. Damage the product while customizing it, Dez Joseph, a prosthetist and orthotist in New York City, told me, and that could invalidate the warranty on a device that can cost as much as or more than a Jaguar.

Insurance also won’t cover the work, because it’s considered cosmetic, Joseph said. And because getting insurance approval for prosthetics can already be a battle, for some people professional customization is effectively impossible. Certain companies, such as Ottobock, offer gloves made to resemble hands (complete with wrinkles), which conceal any labeling, but Schneider and Joseph both told me that these covers can hinder some of the device’s efficacy.

Boeing execs said they held nothing back. The union members took that to be threatening. I genuinely wonder how much profit was actually reserved and how much executive comp is still available to drop into the pool. To me, “holding nothing back” means the company genuinely cannot to fund anything else without going into the red. Holding nothing back means fat was cut, executive pay was reduced, and shareholders understand their dividends are gone because the people that make them money need to get some too. Holding nothing back means some rainy day assets are sold and corporate, non-union members experience some austerity (granted you have to remain competitive so as to not lose your value creators so you can’t cut everything or they’d leave; executives are almost never value creators so they can have austerity measures). Holding nothing back means jobs could be cut if more hardship appears.

Something tells me Boeing was holding stuff back with that offer. It could be all the deferred stock executives have or the lack of shareholder expectation management. Not sure! We’ll never know.

The most frustrating thing about this article is that it completely ignores that good movies targeted at kids still have to be good. Personal complaints aside, the new Mario movie was reasonably good for adults and great for kids. Pixar keeps churning out things that are fantastic on many levels. Bluey is an amazing show that can resonate with kids and parents. I don’t for a minute buy the elitist bullshit of “well you’re not a kid so you can’t comment.” Muppet Treasure Island holds the fuck up as an adult so this writer can fuck right off.

Absolutes in programming tend to lead to bad designs. This is more a “I’m gonna stir up some shit on Twitter” post than real wisdom.

• No microservices usually leads to bloated, tightly coupled logic that ignores business domains
• No monoliths usually leads to sprawling microservice deployments with tightly coupled dependencies and flavor-of-the-week new ones
• No Kubernetes usually leads to VPS pets or crazy obstacle courses trying to get SSL termination without a million fucking dependencies in a cloud container orchestration system that isn’t as good as Kubernetes
• All Kubernetes usually leads to huge SRE costs for a tiny app

The same shit happened last summer when AWS came out with their “we dropped microservices for a monolith and look at our speed increase” article which ignored good design principles. Sometimes you should split things over business domains so you can deploy and code independently. Sometimes Kubernetes is the best way to handle your scale needs. The stories we normally read are about people doing it wrong (eg AWS making a bunch of microservices inside a domain sending fucking gigs of data between what should have been functions in a single service). Inexperienced folks don’t always know when to move from their minimum viable solution to something that can scale. That doesn’t mean you remove these things, it means you train on when you need them.

Should we abandon design patterns because singletons or flywheels aren’t the correct solution all of the time?

This is known as revenge bedtime procrastination and capitalism plays a huge role in it.

Nintendo does not sell hardware at a loss and, IIRC, has done so since the Wii. It was a huge deal back when they said they were going to make a profit off the hardware. Given how abysmally the Wii U did, I’m struggling to find coverage of that from 15yr ago that I only vaguely remember. However, that’s been a major point from Nintendo since the Wii, so it’s ridiculous that Epic wouldn’t know that and is clearly just an attack on Google (please don’t read that as me supporting Google or Epic).

“Patent troll” and “required actions to preserve trademarks” are two totally different things. The former is objectively bad in all ways. The second is explainable if there truly is a trademark and said gear infringes on the trademark and may be excusable if the Linux Foundation is forced to act to preserve their branding (trademark law is weird). It’s even more explainable if this is a shitty auto filter some paralegal had to build without any technical review because IP law firms are hot fucking mess. I’m also very curious to see the original graphics which I couldn’t find on Mastodon. If they are completely unrelated and there was an explicit action by someone who knew better, the explanation provides no excuse.

Attacking any company because the trademark process is stupid doesn’t accomplish much more than attacking someone paying taxes for participating in capitalism.

Swartz wasn’t involved in the origins of Reddit. He got involved when Y Combinator combined his company with Reddit (something along those lines?). He was not an actual founder, just an early influencer. In many ways, decoupling him from the shitshow that Ohanian and Huffman have engendered is a good thing.

This is very similar to the argument of Musk being a founder of Tesla.