Ahh yes, the old “sticks and stones” defense that completely ignores human nature and basic decency. I use the same logic when I tell other people their babies are ugly. “Look, if you ask me your kid is an eyesore but it’s just my opinion so I don’t know why you’re so mad right now…”

Funny, I feel the same way about Fallout and The Witcher. Just… don’t get the appeal. As always, to each their own. Hence why I generally try to avoid yucking other people’s yums.

Same here (well, different model–26k and 87W–but same strategy). Even just as a backup in case of unexpected travel hiccups, a large (airline approved) PD-capable battery back is very handy to have. I never worry about finding an outlet in an aircraft or airport, and I’ve spent my fair share of time stranded in transit.

My Momentum 4s have 60 hours of battery life…

deleted by creator

They’re not.

History has proven over and over again that systemic change doesn’t happen through voluntary individual action unless government creates incentives or nudges to drive that action.

Admonishing people to eat less (or no) meat won’t solve the problem of antibiotic resistance any more than asking them to pollute less fixed global warming.

If anything, asking individuals to sacrifice to solve a problem caused by industry will just harden people against action as it directs blame in exactly the wrong direction.

Another reason to regulate industry, as has already begun in the US and EU. Relying on individual behavioural changes to solve these types of systemic failures simply does not work.

But I’m glad it gives you a reason to feel morally superior.

Keep saying it. It’ll be true eventually.

What?

Compiling quality datasets is enormously challenging and labour intensive. OpenAI absolutely knows the provenance of the data they train on as it’s part of their secret sauce. And there’s no damn way their CTO won’t have a broad strokes understanding of the origins of those datasets.

Or burned out because they get pulled into every project that’s gone off the rails.

Sure, but one disadvantage is they’re harder to stack.

I stand corrected. One project in Italy and two proofs of concept that never went anywhere.

Truly revolutionary.

deleted by creator

You didn’t actually read the page you linked to, did you?

Let’s just jump to the conclusion:

This author believes it is technologically indefensible to call Fossil a “blockchain” in any sense likely to be understood by a majority of those you’re communicating with. Using a term in a nonstandard way just because you can defend it means you’ve failed any goal that requires clear communication. The people you’re communicating your ideas to must have the same concept of the terms you use.

(Emphasis mine)

Hint: a blockchain is always a Merkel tree, but a Merkel tree is not always a blockchain.

the technology itself has its use cases.

Cool.

Name one successful example.

I mean, it’s been, what, 15 years of hype? Surely there must be a successful deployment of a commercially viable and useful blockchain that isn’t just a speculative cryptocurrency or derivative thereof, right?

Right?

Take it to an electronics recycling center. Seriously.

If you already have a homelab, you plan to replace it, you don’t want to repair it, and you don’t have an obvious use case for another machine (it’s just another computer; you either have the need for another computer or you don’t), then holding onto it is just hoarding.

Yes I’m aware of the security tradeoffs with testing, which is why I’ve started refraining from mentioning it as an option as pedants like to pop out of the woodwork and mention this exact issue every damn time.

Also, testing absolutely gets “security support”, the issue is that security fixes don’t land in testing immediately and so there can be some delay. As per the FAQ:

Security for testing benefits from the security efforts of the entire project for unstable. However, there is a minimum two-day migration delay, and sometimes security fixes can be held up by transitions. The Security Team helps to move along those transitions holding back important security uploads, but this is not always possible and delays may occur.

Thats seriously overstating things. I’ve been running testing or sid for years and years, and I can only remember a handful of times where anything meaningfully broke. And typically its dependency breakages, not actual software breakages.

For the target users of Debian stable? No.

Debian stable is for servers or other applications where security and predictability are paramount. For that application I absolutely do not want a lot package churn. Quite the opposite.

Meanwhile Sid provides a rolling release experience that in practice is every bit as stable as any other rolling release distro.

And if I have something running stable and I really need to pull in the latest of something, I can always mix and match.

What makes Debian unique is that it offers a spectrum of options for different use cases and then lets me choose.

If you don’t want that, fine, don’t use Debian. But for a lot of us, we choose Debian because of how it’s managed, not in spite of it.

So don’t run stable on a desktop? If you want a bleeding edge rolling release, that’s what sid is for.