Well my point is that pretty much all of our laws are build around ethic values, which are developed within a society. There is no logical or scientific reason that would make killing other people bad, but we still should have strict rules about this.

Laws are always built around soft things like “what is obscene”, “at what point is someone naked in public”, “How much alcohol can a drink have before it is a alcoholic beverage?”, “did the person die of natural causes, or was killed by some event years ago, that wasn’t properly treated.”

Society decides what is acceptable and what isn’t and that changes through time and culture.

Your argument is therefore not a good one, you have to make a case based on ethics.

This sort of reminds myself on the discussion on “what is a women”. Is Siri a women? Many might say so, but t the same time Siri is not even human.

The question on how old the person on a specific generated image might be and if it even depicts a person at all, can only be answered through society. There is no scientific or any logical answer for this.

So this will always have grey areas and differing opinions and can be rulings in different cultures.

In the end it is about discussions about ethics not logic.

I really hate most subscriptions, because the prices are often too high, they rely on locking stuff behind paywalls, instead of providing a good service.

Here is the difference, I am ok paying monthly for storage space, servers, and hosted/managed open source web services, because there is competition and standard interfaces there. They do not hold you (or your data) hostage to their service, what they provide is good on its own.

For example, if GOG invests money into writing open source libraries, apps and APIs to efficiently and easily share save games between devices. Let people self host the open source backend, but offer up a subscription for a managed instance, with maybe some voting rights for new features or support for games/platforms to be integrated into the open source front & backend, then I would be willing to support this.

And other stuff like this.

Use subscriptions to offer good services, which also allow you to improve the whole ecosystem, while also not putting yourself as the gatekeeper, and locking people into their service.

Well, that could have been fixed by booting from an usb stick, chrooting into you real system and either downloading and (re)installing the python package this way, or, if your package manager depends on python, download the package in the Live Linux and extracting the python package into your system, and then reinstalling it, so the package management overwrites your “manual installation”.

Could be tedious, but less so that having to reinstall everything IMO.

It is more about being lazy.

In most cases, where you havn’t destroyed your filesystem, you can just boot another Linux from a USB stick, mount your filesystems to /mnt, chroot into it, and then investigate and fix there.

See the Archlinux wiki, even if you do not use Archlinux, it is great: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Chroot

No no no! When you break something in Linux systems you fix it. Starting over and reinstalling everything is what you do when you mess up on Windows.

I suppose some of that comes down to the personal understanding of what “smart” is.

I guess you could call some person, that doesn’t understand a topic, but still manages to sound reasonable when talking about it, and might even convince people that they actually have a deep understanding of that topic, “smart”, in a kind of “smart imposter”.

I thought that MinIO is a Open-Source S3 implementation, which you can just install on your own system. S3 is a “protocol” here IIUC.

Is your complaint that they are using the S3 protocol, because it was invented and is controlled by AWS?

Or that some services might use it without MinIO, directly on AWS?

But as long as they are RISC V chips, then they would run the same software as any other RISC V chips.

Not necessarily, RISC-V is permissibly licensed, so they could add proprietary extensions, that would make the binaries or even compilers only work with their implementation of the RISC-V ISA.

Embrace, Extend, Extinguish tactics would work on RISC-V, and I trust billionaires and huge corporations to enshittify it.

Big player joins RISC-V, creates design, introduces proprietary extensions, builds compilers that use them, software depend on them, other RISC-V designers need to license them, because the whole platform now depends on them.

Also based on how complicate it is to port Linux to different SoCs, which at least share a common ISA, it will be much more difficult if you need to support even more RISC-V ISAs with different proprietary extensions, not only in the kernel, but in the toolchain as well.

So a bit like extending Mozilla Application Suite aka Seamonkey instead of focusing on standalone products?

AFAIK, UEFI isn’t technically a requirement. However, TPM 2.0 is, and that requires UEFI.

TPM 2.0 does not require UEFI. I have a system here with TPM 2.0 and only legacy boot support. And you can just buy a TPM 2.0 module and connect it with any board, that has a SPI connector.

TBH, it is very difficult to me differentiating between the different flavors of authoritarians.

Maybe someone can make an easy to understand comparison matrix? You know, “Kills people because they have a different opinion.”, “Suppresses minorities.”, etc.

Interesting discussion about this on the OpenStreetMap forums.

The resolution is introducing “official_name” tags, referencing “en_us”, because “en” is not just the U.S.:

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/gulf-of-america-gulf-of-mexico/124571/11

So when OsmAnd or OrganicMaps start to support them, maybe your locale settings will change the displayed name there as well.

Current description of that node: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/305639190/history/80

So maybe that could be a reason for everyone around the world to stop using en_US locale settings. XD

There are different degrees of vendor lock in. If you use email (or Matrix) with a domain, you have no control over, you are soft-locked it. You can buy a domain, self-host or pay for a managed service and inform everyone that you are now reachable over some other address, but nobody else has to change.

If you use Signal (or Discord or whatever) and want to switch to a different domain. You cannot. If you switch to a different protocol, everyone in your contacts has to switch as well, or you lose that contact. The network effect forces you into the service of one provider. The only way out of there would be if the service get so bad, that a critical mass leaves, but you will have to deal with that bad service all the way.

As long as financial interest are there, non-federated services will sooner or later start to enshittyfy. So if you choose a communication medium, choose something that leaves your options open. If you don’t like Matrix, try XMPP, it has come a long way as well.

Matrix?

IMO the whole “metadata insecurity” stuff about Matrix is over exaggerated. Also Matrix is improving there.

If metadata security is really that important, you could try Tox or similar P2P chats.

Now they will likely spin any critique and demonstrations against the AfD&CDU as “influenced by russia”.

And long term CDU voters will eat it up, since “russia is on the extreme left” or whatever.

We live in an inverted world it seems. It looks like making stuff up is more difficult then just inverting facts.

AFAIK, Signal does not want anyone to use alternative clients, has that changed?

As far as I know moxie, signals lead dev, considers only the use of the officially build and distributed client authorized to use their servers.

So if they ever manage to detect someone using their services with an alternative client, they might delete your account.

https://techcrunch.com/2016/11/07/signal-app-maker-rebuts-criticism-of-dev-direction-by-calling-for-more-community-help/

Well, you can still insert client side decryption into the app.

But it isn’t really about the messages, it is about the control of the servers and the accounts. You cannot easily move away from their servers, because you will lose your contacts. This gives the people controlling the servers power over you. A sort of vendor lockin.

The company (Signal Messenger LLC) is fully owned by Signal Foundation, a 501©3 non profit organization.

OpenAI is also non-profit. Not really an argument.

Probably around 80-90% of Matrix users are on the matrix.org homeserver, so it’s absolutely not as decentralized and resilient as you think it is.

Well, the goal is that moving to your own server, will not mean that you will loose access to all your contacts. Which makes moving instances much simpler. If Matrix gets a hostile take-over, your don’t really need to reach a critical mass for an alternative server.

But you should also be aware that Signal does not federate, so the company can be bought. They have control over all accounts and the servers, without easy way to migrate away again. So it might just be another trap.

Try to use federated services (like matrix), they are more robust against hostile take overs.