WOOOO

Oh yeah I know how predatory of a businessman he was, I just assumed he did it politely.

I’d strongly disagree there too. Y’know basically the entire internet runs on Linux right? Our global communication system containing the sum of all human knowledge is like 99% Linux servers. And the reason a whole bunch of companies sponsor the hell out of Linux now is because it’s just that good and just that important on a global scale.

That seems worse because it means they went out of the way to get so rich, rather than just having it handed to them.

Idk man we just saw a week ago how atrociously Linus used to treat people. Imagine combining that with enough greed to hold onto a billion dollars. Imagine what any of these people would be like if they were the type to ruthlessly exploit others to get rich. I think a billionaire Linus would be worse than Bill Gates. At least Gates is a nice guy.

It is the act of holding onto that much wealth that is immoral, not who is doing it. This is just fantasizing from a painfully neoliberal perspective: OP is imagining the world would be better if the good guys hoarded inconceivable amounts of wealth and exploited the labor of others.

Of course not. The fingerless gloves are also niche, boutique, and premium.

Is commenting for engagement boost a thing?

This is incredible and I never could have imagined it. This will democratize the power of programming

Your position assumes also that no photos can be staged. That’s a whole category of “true” photos that tell a false narrative.

Vimeo is a private operation just like YouTube.

Peertube is a “federated” system where videos are hosted among the computers of the people who upload videos.

Dvorak is a cypher of Qwerty tho. Anything typed in Dvorak but transcribed as english can be reliably identified and decyphered

I think I might have achieved security through obscurity. My custom keyboard is a unique shape and almost all the keys are one unit. Not only is it different enough from a traditional keyboard that the neural network probably won’t understand it, the function layers I use obscure whether I’m typing a letter at all.

Qua is good tho

Well… Mathematicians would agree with me

Nah, lying by omission can still tell a totally wrong narrative. Sometimes it has to be the whole truth to be the truth.

“that it’s a true representation of what someone saw.”

Someone please correct me if I’m wrong but photography has never ever ever been a “true” representation of what you took a picture of.

Photography is right up there with statistics in its potential for “true” information to be used to draw misleading or false conclusions. I predict that a picture with this technology may carry along with it the authority to impose a reality that’s actually not true by pointing to this built-in encryption to say “see? the picture is real” when the deception was actually carried out by the framing or timing of the picture, as has been done often throughout history.

If voting with your money is a valid way for people to collectively decide right and wrong, does that mean people with more money get more votes?

Does that mean the people with the most money get the most votes?

If that’s all true, does that mean if someone has way more money than everyone else, they get to decide what’s right and wrong?

For what it’s worth, every article I’ve seen from them was pretty poignant, relevant, and funny.

Ithkuill

I’m aware of all of this, but most of the software I use is Windows only. Recommending GIMP/whatever seems like enough to a proud Linux user, but it really just doesn’t cut it. I’m savvy enough to get rid of all the stuff I hate about windows or switch to Linux, but I’m comfortable enough to stay with wondoes

1. You can eat them if they have the nutrients you need. Non-carbon-based just means it won’t use carbon as the foundation of its molecular and cellular workings. By mass, there’s relatively little carbon in living organisms and on earth, so whatever’s out there could still use carbon and other elements enough that it has something we could eat. There’s barely any telling what kinds of chemicals will be found in an organism like that, but it could easily be a mix of things we can digest and things we can’t. Even carbon-based life is like that. Wood for example is biologically very similar to us, but is mainly made of cellulose, which we can’t really digest at all.

2. yes, if it fits.