Hermes is also far more (?) obviously the Greek messenger of the gods, so any negative associations with an existing company (that AFAICT doesn't even deal with digital products) shouldn't be relevant.
1,214 karma · joined June 1, 2018
(With Facebook messenger, OTOH, turning off the camera in the UI does not cause the light to be turned off, just like OP described. I haven't tested the other sites/applications, now, but in the ancient times of the old (Qt?) Skype program, the laptop indicator would be turned off when the video stream was turned off.)
Probably not. By the time the switch for release (non-nightly/beta) Firefox comes, I expect all the currently supported extensions will still be supported.
In the long-run, since the new architecture will be generally easier to develop, I hope that some of the WebExtension APIs supported on Desktop, but currently not on Android (on Fennec), will also become available on Android (on Fenix).
Hence, you're not being asked to "transact on hope and trust".
The main difference between donating to KA and a typical business transaction, is that the value of the goods/services provided does not necessarily go to the person providing the payment.
There is an understandable worry about over-payment of executives, but I don't think that the "threat model" is significantly different between for-profits and non-profits. You could argue that in the case of for-profits, competition will weed out companies that over-pay their executives, but internal, corporate politics is likely to trump the market mechanism — at least that's what seems to be happening. As a result, I don't think that it makes sense to excessively harp on executive pay at non-profits you donate to, or at least not more so than you care about the pay of the CEO at a company whose products you buy.
[0] https://docs.python.org/3/library/signal.html#note-on-sigpip...
I had tested linking to specific comments in issue threads, which does work with JS disabled (unless I've completely messed up...), and assumed that linking to parts of documents, as less complex/application-y would obviously work, but as you've pointed out it doesn't.
That's highly disappointing.
Where don't anchors work when javascript is disabled? (With admittedly very brief testing just now, I couldn't find any such cases.)
I don't think that's quite true. You might[0] be discouraged from running your own self-built binaries, but given that Signal Android has reproducible builds[1], I don't think that there's any actual technical barrier. The context of your links is about having (unofficial) third-party packages for Signal, not about somebody building the binary for their own use, and since these are obviously two different things, from a social perspective, I don't think that the Signal foundation would complain much about the latter (given reproducible builds and the fact that you wouldn't be distributing the binaries, they probably wouldn't even know about it).
For Signal-iOS, it seems that you won't get push-notifications if you build by yourself.[2]
[0] I'm not 100 % convinced that "We would not recommend that anyone use an unofficial binary build" was meant to refer to building for yourself, by yourself.
[1] https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/blob/master/Repr...
[2] https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-iOS/blob/master/BUILDING...
I was planning to suggest submitting the link as its own "story" but apparently it already was, two weeks ago.[0]
Except that at the point at which System1 crosses the line, MrAlex94 can fork the code (since it's all FOSS), create "Earthfox" (or whatever) and start again.
> But when you sell out, you give up control to The Man in exchange for that sweet, sweet cash.
I have no skin of the game (other than not wanting free software developers who stray even slightly from the perfect ideal, to be stigmatised), but this sounds rather condescending given that:
1. (to the extent that I know) MrAlex94 has spent most of his working life on an open source project, with little financial remuneration,
2. he's (most probably) not personally getting some vast amount of cash from the transaction, just his project receiving enough support to be able to employ one (?) extra person and get "fancy" features like CI builds.
If he had spent the time working on a closed source project at a company he would have almost certainly been far better off financially and he wouldn't have had to put up with such targeted attacks.
I think that there's very much space for criticising the trade-offs of the decision, but IMO your phrasing was excessively harsh.
> The terms “free software” and “open source” stand for almost the same range of programs.
and he definitely doesn't claim that open source is proprietary.
> I thought we were moving beyond "immigration quotas are racism"?
They're not automatically racist, but support for them can still be motivated by racism, especially when people are willing to risk suffering economically themselves to reduce immigration.
> Eastern Europe is almost entirely white so reducing immigration from there couldn't be racist to start with.
I'm not sure why skin-colour is so important. Jews are "white" (or at the very least the Jews who live/lived in Europe are/were white), but antisemitism is considered a form of racism. In any case, whether you call it "racism" or not, there could still be xenophobia and prejudice.
> People in the UK overwhelmingly want to reduce immigration, something like 80%+ want that so it's a massively bipartisan issue,
I have not seen any such polls. The most that I could find was 76 % in favour of reduced immigration, but I could also find recent (2019/11) polls with a small majority (56 %) in favour of keeping FoM. The latter seems consistent with the result of the recent GE where more people voted for parties intending to keep FoM than those that wanted to get rid of it (the split was around 54-46). The former poll could also, in principle be (people would like to reduce immigration, but on net, would not want to lose FoM, including their own FoM; also elections aren't single-issue).
> not because the entire country is seething with racism
Nobody is claiming that everybody even slightly opposed to immigration is racist — that would be absurd.
> but because the existing policy recognises no limits on infrastructure build outs.
The fact that people are generally most in favour of reducing immigration in the areas with the least immigration weakens the argument that they're motivated by legitimate concerns about the infrastructure not coping.
> But sure, whatever, by all means, believe a place immigrants choose to move in huge numbers is filled with hatred and racism against them
Immigrants also move from South Asia to the Middle East, despite there being immense systemic discrimination against them, for economic reasons.
I haven't been able to find any reliable statistics about this, and it probably depends on how you define "race".
> 2. And which just elected a government with a historically huge mandate, partly because the opposing party was plagued by accusations of anti-semitism?
This is just bizarre. It would be far more justifiable to argue that some people voted for the government partly because they wanted to end Freedom of Movement, to reduce immigration into the UK. Discussing why these people wanted reduced immigration is more complicated, though since there's no real economic grounds for it, the main possibilities are misinformation (fuelled by certain media, because it sells well), scapegoating and xenophobia.
Also, what about the 32 % of people who voted for Labour despite it supposedly being "plagued by accusations of anti-semitism"?
In any case, since elections are never about one issue, drawing these sorts of conclusions is dangerous.
Sorry, no, purely "anecdata", mainly based on a variety of personal and family laptops and desktop computers. There have been occasional IT department-managed update nightmares, but I don't count these.
1. Running `sudo apt update && sudo apt upgrade` is much, much faster than explicitly going to the windows update screen, checking for updates and then updating.
2. Linux OSs are usually stuck "updating" while shutting down and restarting, far less frequently and for a far shorter time (if at all), than Windows.
Obviously the comparison isn't entirely fair (though in some ways the comparison is biased against Linux, since its update also usually includes the vast majority of user-space programs), but comparing the percentage of "updating time" of two OSs (whatever the technical reasons) seems to be reasonable, to me.
No it doesn't. (At least not with the definition of "most voted option" that was used by gioele.)
B would beat F in a one-to-one contest, so the majority thinks that "Systemd but we support exploring alternatives" is preferable to "Focus on systemd".
But Proposal F is very clearly NOT above them all. 207 people preferred B over F, while only 185 people preferred F over B.
If F were above them all, it would be the Condorcet winner and hence would have necessarily won according to the Schulze method, which it didn't.
B actually is the Condorcet winner, as it would beat every single other option in a one-to-one contest. (The fact that B is the winner according to the Schulze method doesn't necessarily imply that it is the Condorcet winner, as there might not be a Condorcet winner.)
F being the "most voted option" is a misleading and mostly vacuous statement. All that can be said is that more people preferred F to "further discussion" (303 vs. 110), than preferred any other option to "further discussion". In particular, only 299 vs. 111 preferred B to "further discussion". However that has no bearing whatsoever on whether people preferred F over B.
(My theory for why B didn't beat "further discussion" by quite such a large margin as F did, is that in the case of B both the only-systemd "extremists" and the anti-systemd "extremists" preferred "further discussion" to B, while in the case of F only the anti-systemd "extremists" preferred "further discussion" to F.)
Not that unpopular.
(Partially tongue-in-cheek:)
Select the doi, in this case on the left side of the first page, but usually present somewhere in the article, and paste it in a new tab. In this case:
https://doi.org/10.1017/S1473550418000095
which leads to what zgniatacz linked.
> [...] the prior industrial activity would have actually given rise to the potential for future industry via their own demise.
See page "148", mid-way through the second column for details. (It's a shame that Fermat's Library doesn't provide an interface for deep-linking parts of the article.)
On a time-scale of thousands of years to (probably) single-digit millions of years, you're almost certainly right, though.
The context is the French implementation of the EU copyright directive (the one that contained Articles "11" and "13" (though the numbering was later changed)).
16433 / 60e6 / 10 * 100% = 0.0027% [1]
See also MacKay's Without Hot Air take on a similar topic.[2]
Since OVO is an energy company, they definitely should know better. Charitably, they're being extraordinarily stupid. Uncharitably they're trying to push their "Carbon Capper" chrome extension which is probably spyware or trying to distract people from more serious issues.
[0] https://www.ovoenergy.com/ovo-newsroom/press-releases/2019/n...
[1] The UK has a population of about 60 million and the CO2 footprint is about 10 t per person.
To add a bit more detail / a slight correction: Zotero did indeed start purely as a Firefox extension, but Zotero Standalone was released in 2011[0], far before the switch to WebExtensions. For a while, the Firefox extension and Zotero standalone were equally featured — i.e. you could use just the Firefox extension, or use Zotero standalone + the Chromium connector extension, and in both cases you'd get the same functionality. After the switch to WebExtensions, the Firefox extension was reduced to being purely a connector, just like the Chromium one.
Were you using Nightly?
If not, then it's most probably unrelated.
> Let’s lay out the facts: China is conducting human rights violations on the largest scale the world has seen since Nazi Germany.
Even if you ignore events like the Cambodian genocide by the Khmer rouge or the Rwandan genocide, on the basis that, while far more intensive, they affected a considerably smaller population, China's own cultural revolution was a far greater human rights violation than what is happening now in China. (Arguably, in terms of scope, it was even worse than anything than the Nazis did, even if its intentions were probably more benign.)
I'd recommend changing the quoted sentence to something to the effect of "one of the largest scales".
View > Zoom > Zoom Text Only
and then zoom in/out as you desire.
The setting is unfortunately global, so you can't zoom in the page on some sites and zoom in the text on others. (You can toggle the setting, though, and the "zoom amount" is remembered per-site, irrespective of toggling.)
There are probably also some extensions that would be more flexible and work on more browsers. (I'm pretty sure that Vimperator (RIP) had an option to separately change text size and overall zoom.)
Many people use “free speech” to describe more than what is covered by the First Amendment in the USA. For instance, freedom from retaliation, by being fired from your job. According to that view, entities other than the government can engage in suppressing free speech.