Show newer

"Why don't you trust corporate FOSS? It's still FOSS, isn't it? Why are you being so difficult?"

Honestly salaries should just be legally required to automatically increase according to the inflation rate.

(If you think that's a bad idea because it would lead to hyperinflation, I would invite you to introspect for a moment on what that says about income inequality and where the inflation comes from)

ive had conversations with people who are Unwilling to change their opinion even though i have receipts and proof of their opinion being wrong

then a few days later, for the fuck of it, i'll have the same conversation with them, this time repeating their own opinion back to them

all of the sudden they are self-rightious because they have a better opinion again: the one i recited to them several days earlier 😅

i see through your shit & you know too, i can tell lmao

ur fake af, be fr

Sometimes it feels like just saying/thinking "actually what I already have is just fine" is a radical counter-cultural act in such a consumerist society.

It should maybe be illegal for a company to change the Privacy Policy on a product you already own/are using.

The policy changes are worded like "you agree to it if you keep using our product", but this is coersion.

If I bought a watch from you and you decide you want to sell my biometrics now, my choices are to throw away the money I spent or agree.

If I have all my digital life in your services and you change your policy like that, I have to somehow uproot all my data and possibly my business or how I connect with family or friends before the time expires, or you get to go mine all my data now because you said so?

This feels all very wrong.

Show thread

For folx who say things like “I’m entitled to my opinions”…I agree with the caveat that so does IMPACT & ACCOUNTABILITY

This is also a double edge sword that folx, particularly from marginalized communities, don’t realize they’re walking…yes…everyone has opinions, the issue is when those with opinions ALSO have the power and privilege to turn their opinions into systems, institutions, and policies

I find it kind of fascinating how people talk about "reliable hosting providers" and then only ever mention the big names, despite them usually not actually providing the most reliable service

To all of my security friends in Vegas this week, I will miss seeing you, please mask up and stay safe. I don't want any of you to get long Covid or infect others with weakened immune systems. Return home healthy and inspired to spread your hackery!

#HackerLife #infosec #blackhat #defcon

A stopped clock tells the right time twice a day. But if you can afford 720 stopped clocks then you never have to be without the correct time.

"We can have both a nice community *and* features that people miss from Twitter" 

Okay, but like, *how*?

I see some variation of this claim constantly, and it sounds very confident, but suspiciously absent every time is any kind of solution to "how do we combine the two".

People have - rightly - expressed concerns about those features, and how they encourage certain behaviours. If you think they can coexist, how would you prevent those behaviours? How do you mitigate the negative effects?

Just saying "they can both exist" without actually addressing people's concerns essentially amounts to saying "I don't believe that your concerns are valid, I'm sure it'll all magically work out"

... which I hope I don't need to explain why that's a problematic approach.

Had an interesting conversation yesterday with someone that reminded me how weird Corporate and Open Source development is.

He asked what sort of qualifications and degrees are required to work on the rust compiler.

I told him: "Well, none. You could grab a ticket and create a PR. Now, getting that PR landed means it's going to be super scrutinized."

There are PhDs with dozens of AWS certs relying on code written by college drop-outs.

It's a really, really weird world.

Twitter thread (uplifting, positive, image file w/ ID) 

Saving this exchange about Peter S. Beagle being a great hecking guy for posterity, since Twitter's gonna pretty much die and I don't want it to be hard to find.

today I want to commemorate an old friend: the fox that used to hang out at the Sainsbury's Braehead car park

I've not seen them in like 6 years, but I remember them fondly

Actually more generally, I'm not sure people realize how much *technically worse* everything is just because making it actually good wouldn't result in anything that could be monetized.

And I'm not just talking about the stuff that everybody is familiar with, like DRM schemes.

I'm talking about extremely commonplace design decisions in software development, that many people have just accepted as "this is how software is I guess", or don't even notice, but that really only are that way for reasons of monetization.

Why don't these two pieces of software integrate together? Because they couldn't work out a licensing model that wouldn't allow one company to screw the other, and capitalism is full of vultures.

Why is there a weird centralized service in this supposedly 'decentralized' system? Because if it were truly decentralized, the company developing it wouldn't have a 'point of control' that allows them to charge people for using the system.

Why do I need to do this weird dance with drivers? Because there's some third party developing the drivers, and if they didn't tightly restrict who can distribute the result, they wouldn't be able to charge for it, so you as an end user have to do extra work to download them.

Why is this a whole startup with excess complexity, rather than just a small utility that does one thing well? Because small forgettable utilities are not marketable to a point of VC-level profitability.

And so on, and so forth. *So many* shitty things in technology can be explained by "someone, somewhere along the chain wanted to make money off this, and implementing it right wouldn't have allowed for that".

Show thread

The reason States don't prosecute the pyramid scheme called "Capitalism" out of existence is self-defense,
Statism itself is also a pyramid scheme and the pyramids almost entirely overlap.

Of course the reason is that you can't plausibly sell a bundle of two things you didn't make, and so they invent weird shit like this to have a product to sell

Show thread

@scalzi "There has been some misinformation spreading around regarding our company policy. Our company is NOT extracting and selling customer souls (to the third party entity Baphomet). Any soul extraction is done solely for improvement of internal soul engines and our trusted partners*.

Fineprint: *Abraxas, Beelzebub, Ifrit, Orcus, Rakshasa, Samael, Wendigo, Xezbeth, Zartai-Zartanai (our partner group will include Astaroth, Baphomet, Demigorgon in Q1 2024)"

White supremacy is NOT political party specific

Left, right or center means NOTHING when maintaining white supremacy is the priority

Show older
Pixietown

Small server part of the pixie.town infrastructure. Registration is closed.