It seems interesting that the norms argued for here are contrary to the norms in a field like journalism, where journalists have an obligation to ask relevant people for comment. I'm not arguing for one approach over the other, but it would be interesting to look at the development of journalistic norms for counterarguments.
Where he speaks from intuition I speak from personal experience. Through my entire High School experience iPads and computers were more often used to play Clash Royale or Tetris in class than used for actual work.
This is probably also why both companies give out free licenses to primary and high school students (at least in Australia). It causes a positive feedback loop, where their software (e.g. photoshop) becomes the industry standard because most people have been taught to use it, and it is taught in schools because it is the industry standard.
Rhetorical question: If they don't trust the project why would they trust binaries through a package manager.
I am sure the authors provide those shell scripts to ease the burden of installation for users so dragging them down into being "dodgy" is really really unfriendly.
> I don't think there's any way to handle spam/moderation in a fully anonymous decentralised network.
Surely you could have small bayesian engines running in each client, and coordinate ratings through DHT. It would still have the issue of somebody potentially abusing such engine to effectively DDOS certain types of messages (e.g. mentioning a certain party), but you could try and fight that with modern consensus techniques from the cryptocurrency world.
The lack of filter availability doesn't stop spammers bypassing even Google's uber-filters, so it's not much of an argument really. The arm race is what it is. The point is having a system that can react fast enough to remove the spam from most systems once it is identified.
> The point is having a system that can react fast enough to remove the spam from most systems once it is identified.
Then you need a system for distributing filter updates, and preventing the spammers from distributing bogus filter updates. Isn't this basically just the same problem as before?
I'd like to know this, too. What sets it apart? I'm especially curious about performance, because both Deluge and qBittorrent chug a little bit on my machine when I have too many torrents listed.
Qbittorrent recently introduced sql based resume file it is advanced option in beta I see an improvement with about 1000 torrent. Though for 1000+ torrents most people recommend rtorrent.
Not OP (and not yet uninstalling firefox, but it feels ever closer), but it feels like mozilla have done something sneaky and questionable every quarter now for the past 2 years. For OP, this is possibly the straw that broke the camel's back
As far as I know, Firefox is the easiest browser to add this back in. Right click on basically any search box and Add A Search Shortcut and you can bind it to "ya" or something.
Similar to duck duck go bangs but it has to be a prefix and ! Isn't required. w => wipedia, y => youtube
I feel like this is a weird attitude to have toward an open-source software project. "Sure, developers added 900 performance improvements / new features / bug fixes this quarter to a browser I get to use for free, but they also did 2 non-critical things I don't really care for so now I oppose this software."
I do think it would have been _better_ if Firefox made the set of included-by-default search providers something that gets merged into your profile, so that future removals only affect new installations / new profiles (and existing users who happen to use that engine don't have to go out of their way to re-add them after an update). I don't really care _which_ search engine definitions come with a browser out-of-the-box, as long as they're easy to customize.
I fancy myself a fairly technically aware person, and I have no idea what improvements, features or bug fixes Firefox added this quarter that would outweigh all the little and big bad things. In terms of performance, a recent patch made Electrolysis or what it is they called their per-domain process thing the default, immediately making CPU and especially RAM usage shoot up massively (as well as introducing some new bugs pertaining to dead IPC pipes). I tried to put up with it for maybe a week and then switched it off by an about:config switch, which I'm entirely sure they will remove in another 10 versions at the latest. The only way in which I see them adding features takes the form of supporting the latest of the stream of under-the-hood changes that keep coming out of Google's web standard printer, which generally seem to add no user-visible functionality or benefits but are inevitably relied on by some random subset of important websites resulting in the internet gradually breaking if I don't want to update my browser.
I would much rather they use their dwindling influence on standards bodies to block and sabotage the changes that necessitate the constant updating (and attendant maintenance burden which takes smaller browser projects out of the running) at every turn; and if it so happens that this results in their influence disappearing even faster and/or them getting booted, then at least this may pave the way for the long-overdue antitrust suit against Google that many have been saying Mozilla's existence serves to prevent.
(It's not like Firefox is developed by unpaid volunteers. Am I using the browser "for free" if Google sees it as advantageous to pay them money for, among others, my continued existence as a user of the browser?)
If I put a 5 year old in front of a polygon based 3D modelling program they will have no idea what to do, and even if I teach them the tools they will have trouble. If I put a 5 year old in front of Minecraft they will eventually figure out how to build stuff. I hope this answers your question.
I get where you are coming from, but falsifying election results and population polling are a bit different. putin himself is polling very frequently to get feedback (or validation) and until a few weeks ago there were even somewhat credible polling agencies that showed lower numbers but still majority.
> I get where you are coming from, but falsifying election results and population polling are a bit different
Do you remember "garbage in - garbage out"?
If people fed nothing but bravado on how the glorious leader shines the path to the wonderful future, how in the world they would see him in a negative light?
The last two years showed everyone what even the professionals are happy to spew an utter nonsense, directly contradicting their profession and education, just because they want to feel that way.
And remember - population polling gives you information on how people feel about something, not why do they feel that way.
PS:
"Let us ask your opinion on these matters:
1. How do you feel about our President?
#a I'm delighted to live in this glorious days and I'm fully supported our glorious leader!
#b I'm a shithead and prefer to spend the rest of my days in gulag."
Hyperbole, sure, but how the poll is constructed, where it was performed also matters.
I kind of agree with you on "garbage in - garbage out" .. majority eats up garbage and therefore approve putin. Decision to eat garbage still lays with them.
On the other hand, I have a limited amount of empathy and at the moment it is being consumed by people who are actually being bombed by not their own government.
I would say believing that garbage is on them. [1]
But when you have nothing other than garbage?
Don't forget what this is the country where you can be detained for holding an invisible placard [0] - so saying something out of the party line is a quick way for the unemployment at least, hence the people who could had provided some other info (primarily on TV) have big incentives not to do so.
[1] which is another joke because half of those people lived or at least were born when "government never tells the truth" was the default MO even for the government itself.
It's not about the word game. The word game is a symptom of a larger social problem.
edit: To expand on that, today it's a word game. Before that, it's Joe Rogan. Before that, it's Dr. Seuss books. There is ALWAYS something to be outraged about.
It's even better because, Rogan and Dr Seuss are still there and nothing really bad happened to them at all. This person you're replying to is acting like they're a crusader of truth against evil when all it is is people have complained a bit about something. Who is the one over-reacting?
Spotify has removed a bunch of episodes from his podcast. Some Dr. Seuss books got pulled because "racism".
Those who forget (or maybe just don't know) history are doomed to repeat it. It always starts with silencing dissenters. Just look at what happened in Canada.
But hey, I guess in stnmtn's world there is nothing worth complaining about unless people end up in the gulag. But by then it is too late.
