Removed by mod

Removed by mod

Someone should keep an eye on Linus.

Why someone keeps chasing the latest gadgets when the old ones work just fine is beyond me.

Nobody is waiting every year for the brand new line of washing machines. Why is there a need to swap phones this frequently?

I imagine it wouldn’t take long until someone finds a way to disable that LED.

Sounds like the best way to cripple your scientific and tech sector.

• Nethack

Yes the interface is a mess. But it’s ridiculously deep once you get into it.

The CEO of Unity was also CEO, COO, and president of EA. So, is anyone surprised?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Riccitiello

Or even better: buy soon to expire put options just before the announcement. 10x your money.

Damn… that’s rough.

Hopefully they’ll backpedal on this decision for now (they are already getting a lot of flack). But I guess the message has been sent. Wouldn’t be surprised if Unity starts bleeding users after this.

Best of luck!

For the studios releasing a game in a few months, it’s probably too late to ditch unity, but would make sense to start looking at alternatives for their next projects.

Wouldn’t be surprised if Godot explodes in popularity in the next 5 years.

According to the article, it’s not retroactively charged, but still bad if your game is about to come out and you haven’t accounted for this.

The margins on the gamedev industry are not that large, you should read some testimonies from veterans. It’s a ruthless industry.

Games take years to make, and you can’t change engines now if your game is about to come out.

People who made it that far up are usually very driven, their job is their whole identity.

It’s probably hard to walk away from something they dedicated so much of their life to. More so if it involved sacrificing time for relationships, family, friends, etc.

defend their 1st and 2nd amendment rights.

I thought this was in Canada.

I see you already have an answer using podman.

But don’t be afraid of the command line. If you can copy/paste a few commands, it’s pretty easy to set up.

I honestly find installing docker harder than to start a locally hosted searxng instance.

Also, something like self-hosting your own email is way harder and requires a lot more maintenance. I’d leave that project to further down the line.

Not sure it will solve your problem, but if you’re not happy with the public SearXNG instances, you can run your own instance of SearXNG on your local machine, and even set up custom filters and redirects to get rid of SEO junk.

The EFF has supported the prosecution of Kiwi Farms, but not by using ISP blocks.

They understand that setting a legal precedent like this may cause serious harm to other people in the future (e.g. women).

Once an ISP indicates it’s willing to police content by blocking traffic, more pressure from other quarters will follow, and they won’t all share your views or values. For example, an ISP, under pressure from the attorney general of a state that bans abortions, might decide to interfere with traffic to a site that raises money to help people get abortions, or provides information about self-managed abortions. Having set a precedent in one context, it is very difficult for an ISP to deny it in another, especially when even considering the request takes skill and nuance. We all know how lousy big user-facing platforms like Facebook are at content moderation—and that’s with significant resources. Tier 1 ISPs don’t have the ability or the incentive to build content evaluation teams that are even as effective as those of the giant platforms who know far more about their end users and yet still engage in harmful censorship.

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/08/isps-should-not-police-online-speech-no-matter-how-awful-it

I have written nothing implying that, no.

From the very first reply, you implied that the argument that the EFF made was wrong, and that this precedent could not be used to block women’s access to abortion: “It’s incredibly easy for an ISP to point out that they’re not going to block a network for a different reason by pointing out it’s… not the same reason. Banning abortion information is not the same thing as banning a harassment network that’s causing deaths.”

I’ve said the EFF’s argument is bullshit because the US government cannot enforce the laws the EFF says could be used. Not that they don’t exist, but that this is an international network that heavily uses anonymity. The US government likely cannot at all, and if it can can only do expensively and slowly, too slowly to prevent deaths, ban this website.

If that’s the case, how did they get Ross Ulbricht? He ran a darkweb marketplace, in theory, harder to pin down than something on the clearnet like Kiwi Farms.

The same precedent that bans Kiwi Farms at the ISP level, could be used to block women’s access to safe abortion, causing deaths as well. And no, I’m not gonna take your word for it that it can be avoided in court in the future. You’re just some rando on the internet with no legal expertise, unlike the EFF.

I’m all in favor in prosecuting people responsible for peoples’ deaths and shutting down that website, but not by using something that could cause harm to others in the future.