I can’t imagine any way this is possible without crowdsourced information, and at that point you’re just interacting with a community (likely the same one as you already do) through a different interface.

Though, if such an interface existed, it might be a cool project.

This isn’t a good summary, just a random assortment of paragraphs. The quotes lack all context. Autotldr tries its best, but it clearly wasn’t enough this time.

If I read the article properly, Britain is waking to what’s going to be a long-lasting and shameful Brexit-hangover for a long time.

Little will be gained—if anything at all—and it’s expected that the results will be disappointing for all involved. There’s no fixing years of wasted, directionless political effort; rather, Britain will now enjoy plugging, bit by frustrating bit, the holes it dug into itself.

It baffles me that people actually voted for this. For all its faults, there’s nothing like the EU. Yet, after this mess, they’re just rolling with it?

I’m getting a bit tired of seeing boobs nonsensically attached to concepts/objects. It’s not like female coding characters is a sin per se, but I often find that the material would lose nothing in its absence. Like now—there’s an entire panel dedicated to showing their love. So why bother?

So yeah, I dislike it and also think it’s unnecessarily.

That said, if by “so we know it’s not a gay romance” you mean that to be the artist’s intent, I don’t see why that must be the case. Without looking into them, it seems just as likely that they could’ve simply not thought about it at all. Maybe they’re straight and just drew that. While it wouldn’t be LGBT+ inclusive, it needn’t necessarily be “so that people don’t think it’s gay.”

Hope I didn’t wildly misread or overanalyze your comment. You’re clearly not glad, but I can’t tell if you’re adding the last part for the sake of humor, or if you were bothered by what you believed to be a possible LGBT+ exclusionary depiction of romance.

Darn, today I learned that Mr. Rogers was ready for war.

Neat, I really like the gray one. Are they comfortable to rest your arms on? As in, does the texture not bother you?

Were the community rules copied straight out of Reddit or something? 3 and 9 are a bit funny.

Unrelated, but I just found out there’s a .youtube TLD. Not sure how to feel about this.

Some features of premium actually sound really interesting, but I find myself struggling to reconcile my interest in both those features and the general idea of an internet that isn’t built upon ads with my strong dislike of Google and a sincere wish to give them as little money as possible.

Oh, we’re fully in agreement. I’m not arguing in favor of abandoning Firefox or Mozilla at all. I’m just saying frustration and anxiety are to be expected sometimes. Note that I’m not excusing rudeness or the like.

Re: the burden of developing a modern browser, I wonder what librewolf evangelists think would happen to the project, if Firefox development by Mozilla were to fall due to any reason. To my view, the forks only exist because Firefox still does. After all, if managing an entire browser was possible with their resources, they wouldn’t need to fork one.

I try my best to keep calm and judge things fairly and rationally but, truth is, you get kinda tired of seeing so many iffy-maybe-alright news about Mozilla.

My fear is that by the time “something happens” to Firefox, it’ll be something that was entirely avoidable if only we had acted sooner. I’m always wondering if I’m at the point I should be acting.

• I’m still salty about their previous CEO, Mitchell Baker, I believe, getting bigger bonuses while Firefox market share fell (and layoffs happened, but we lack details to understand those properly).
• I’m unconvinced that, in a world where the percentage of people using an adblocker is rising, they’ll find a way to change people’s minds and look at ads, even if they are perfectly, technomagically privacy preserving.
• I’m unconvinced that owning Firefox, which puts uBlock as a front-and-center extension, and Anonym, and adtech company, will not create a conflict of interest—just like what happened to Google.

For the record, this is my first time commenting on this and I’m also deeply bothered by “reactionary nerds” (everyone switch to librewolf!!), but I understand the sentiment. Hope that added some perspective.

ruled that the downstream emissions of fossil fuel extraction projects must be considered in the approvals process

Could anyone who knows more about this chime in to explain what we can expect out of this, considering real world politics?

• How likely is it that projects will be “properly considered” and then approved anyway?
• Do companies currently have to take responsibility in any capacity for the consequences of previously considered emissions?

Oh bummer, forgot about that. Assuming it needn’t be my only/main account, I could create a p.dev one, if it helps.

No modding experience, but Linux & tech news remain a strong hyperfixation interest of mine. If that’s enough, I could give it a shot.

Anyone knows if Mozilla ever made a statement on the state of MS’s LLM training on Github data? I’m curious if they don’t care about having Firefox be part of the dataset or if they just think the benefits outweigh that.

If you have a bit of time to spare, see this great article for a some history on Mozilla and version control.

You’re right, regarding Mastodon. I won’t edit my other comment, though, both to preserve the original chain of thought and because that brings up another discussion.

To quote the EFF:

We feel that the intended usage of the feature will not determine people’s expectation of privacy while using it.

Offering people a feature with preexisting expectations, similar to other things that fulfill those expectations, then telling people “We know it looks like a duck but don’t expect it to quack!”

…It begs the question: was the feature really a good idea?

And it’s also damming for private messaging on mastodon.

I once read vague complaints about it being a rushed implementation. While I won’t trust those without evidence, I for sure wouldn’t trust mastodon with my PMs. At least, not until how this was allowed to happen is figured out and fixed if necessary.

It seems less anti-theft and more “data protection in case of theft.”

I’m not sure that’s a fair assessment (after all, what should a proper anti-theft measure even look like, then?), but that’s the best way I can describe it. From what I can tell, it’s more tech that attempts to lock the screen when it believes your phone isn’t safe.

More data protection is always nice, provided it works. Don’t know if it’ll help with the actual theft any, since I believe the stolen phones are usually factory reset and then resold all over. User data was never the main appeal.

It’s mildly funny that this will be tested in Brazil. Fitting. A sad kind of funny that I can’t help snorting at.

Honestly, that strategy feels like the most sensible one, since the real world often does not (or can not afford to) care to wait for v1.0.0 before using software. It’s no wonder so many programming ecosystems have adopted it.

I find it a bit of a shame it’s not part of the semver specification itself, which only states:

4. (paraphrased) do whatever you want haha

My point is, I don’t think that’s “your bad.” It’s just how it is, and the best there currently is. Unless you think there’s something that could’ve been done better, in which case I’m curious as to what, if you’re willing to share.

Ubuntu based, yes. Completely slipped my mind. OP, if there is a repo, this is probably the easiest solution.