IHeartBadCode @ IHeartBadCode @kbin.social

Posts

2

Comments

750

Joined

2 yr. ago

It won't work for sure. That said, with the rich continually robbing people left and right by hording the last bits of wealth on this planet, desperate people do desperate things. For the time everyone's mostly still sticking to the Democratic mode of trying to solve that issue, but I wouldn't give it much longer before that option starts running out for some folks.

Milei has a very, very steep hill to climb, a world economic system that's less interested in helping him out, and a Congress that's not exactly weighing in his favor. He is very much two or three steps away from civil unrest in his country. Lots of luck to him, maybe he's thinking he'll be able to fake till he makes it or something.

Kavanaugh and Barrett only joined the majority opinion on a super specific technicality just FYI. There is no way they did not want this to go ahead and be enforced in Florida.

As a reminder, Firefox's Manifest v3 implementation will differ from Google's. Additionally, it isn't that Manifest v3 is the problem, it is that Manifest v2 compatibility is being mostly removed from all browsers. You can literally have V2 and V3 in your browser no issue technically there.

But it is important to remember what prompted this. Most extension authors are well meaning people, but in due course they will make decisions that aren't exactly widely accepted. Case in point was Stylish which was an extension that allowed one to apply various CSS styles to websites. Long story short, good intentions by the author, poor execution.

Manifest v3 was aimed to reduced the vectors that things like Stylish used to carryout their activities. This however, does damage the ability for uBlock to handle some of the various sophisticated ways adverts gets into your webpage. Firefox's implementation is an attempt to meet some middle ground. Additionally, Google has made some concessions to the final format of Manifest v3 to permit SOME ad-blocking that uBlock has indicated that they need.

In the end the important thing to remember is that uBlock Origin's manifest V2 version will be ending soon. There is a "lite" version of uBlock Origin that is compatible with Manifest v3, your mileage may vary with it however. Firefox offers the only solution at this time that is permissive enough to continue uBlock Origin's current development and ability to block most sophisticated adverts from getting into your page.

And the whole Manifest v3 issue highlights just how not open web standards are today. Yes, there is a standards body that issues the standards that govern the web. That body was once independent and sought a web for all. Today that standards body is mostly "what's Google doing?" And that has become problematic and mostly is why "everything is Chromium" at this point. Folks like Opera and Microsoft saw the political landscape at the Web Standards changing, read the writing on the wall, and converted over to Chromium. The vast majority of the issue is that the standards committee has become complicit in just accepting whatever Google offers up as a purposed standard. They have become mostly a rubber stamp for the machinations of Google's engineers to the detriment of everyone.

Hey what y'all talking about?

I am so sorry this got so long. I'm absolutely horrible at brevity.

Applications use things called libraries to provide particular functions rather than implement those functions themselves. So like "handle HTTP request" as an example, you can just use a HTTP library to handle it for you so you can focus on developing your application.

As time progresses, libraries change and release new versions. Most of the time one version is compatible with the other. Sometimes, especially when there is a major version change, the two version are incompatible. If an application relied on that library and a major incompatible change was made, the application also needs to be changed for the new version of the library.

A Linux distro usually selects the version of each library that they are going to ship with their release and maintain it via updates. However, your distro provider and some neat program you might use are usually two different people. So the neat program you use might have change their application to be compatible with a library that might not make it into your distro until next release.

At that point you have one of two options. Wait until your distro provides the updated library or the go it alone route of you updating your own library (which libraries can depend on other libraries, which means you could be opening a whole Pandora's box here). The go it alone route also means that you have to turn off your distro's updates because they'll just overwrite everything you've done library wise.

This is where snaps, flatpaks, and appimages come into play. In a very basic sense, they provide a means for a program to include all the libraries it'll need to run, without those libraries conflicting with your current setup from the distro. You might hear them as "containerized programs", however, they're not exactly the Docker style "container", but from an isolating perspective, that's mostly correct. So your neat application that relies on the newest libraries, they can be put into a snap, flatpak, or appimage and you can run that program with those new libraries no need for your distro to provide them or for you to go it alone.

I won't bore you on the technical difference between the formats, but just mostly focus on what I usually hear is the objectionable issue with snaps. Snaps is a format that is developed by Canonical. All of these formats have a means of distribution, that is how do you get the program to install and how it is updated. Because you know, getting regular updates of your program is still really important. With snaps, Canonical uses a cryptographic signature to indicate that the distribution of the program has come from their "Snaps Store". And that's the main issue folks have taken with snaps.

So unlike the other kinds of formats, snaps are only really useful when they are acquired from the Canonical Snaps Store. You can bypass the checking of the cryptographic signature via the command line, but Ubuntu will not automatically check for updates on software installed via that method, you must check for updates manually. In contrast, anyone can build and maintain their own flatpak "store" or central repository. Only Canonical can distribute snaps and provide all of the nice features of distribution like automatic updates.

So that's the main gripe, there's technical issues as well between the formats which I won't get into. But the main high level argument is the conflicting ideas of "open and free to all" that is usually associated with the Linux group (and FOSS [Free and open-source software] in general) and the "only Canonical can distribute" that comes with snaps. So as @sederx indicated, if that's not an argument that resonates with you, the debate is pretty moot.

There's some user level difference like some snaps can run a bit slower than a native program, but Canonical has updated things with snaps to address some of that. Flatpak sandboxing can make it difficult to access files on your system, but flatpak permissions can be edited with things like Flatseal. Etc. It's what I would file into the "papercut" box of problems. But for some, those papercuts matter and ultimately turn people off from the whole Linux thing. So there's arguments that come from that as well, but that's so universal "just different in how the papercut happens" that I just file that as a debate between container and native applications, rather a debate about formats.

As soon as we declare independence, we're going to be wealthy.

Hey I'm pretty sure the UK could let you know a thing or two about aforementioned topic.

A separate currency

Oh yeah, just FYI, world market does oil trade in US dollars which you wouldn't have access to and would make selling that oil to US aligned countries really difficult. And the countries that aren't US aligned, they know that, so they'll be expecting deals for them or they won't buy your oil either.

I personally believe that our personal GDP will double in five to seven years.

That's going to be really difficult as you'll become more toxic than Chernobyl soil on the International market and Texas has no where near enough domestic trade to actually hit that 200% GDP in seven years.

But let's be frank here, an independent Texas would not go bankrupt. They have enough cash and product to stay afloat. But much like the US Civil War taught us all, that the Confederates found out super fast what happens when they get cut off from literally every market on the planet Earth. It makes it really difficult to keep that bottom line from going red and really forces governments to either make really difficult calls on how to govern their slowly decaying nation or start a war and try to convince the world that they should trade with them.

Texas would not crumble overnight but they would be hurting very badly economically. They would in fact be very poor. Very, very poor. If they think their oil is going to save them, go ask Venezuela how that's working for them.

Acting like you have the intellectual capacity to negotiate the legislative process is, contrary to this Senator's belief, not political correctness.

It's a combination of things and to just simply blame MAGA is doing a disservice. Before we had MAGA we had antivax on the rise. We did after all have Andrew Wakefield and Jenny McCarthy.

But more importantly what fuels a lot of this is ignorance. Some willful, some that cannot be helped, and some just not an easy thing for one to wrap one's head around. That ignorance fuels fear, uncertainty, and doubt something that's sometimes referred to as FUD. And that can manifest into all kinds of things, chief among them is outrage which MAGA acolytes feed into for political gain. Because that's how the MAGA crew keeps fuel in it's tank, feeding into outrage.

And for a moment, I'd ask everyone to take a look around. Look at the world we are in. Plenty to be outraged about, right? But while you might find specific things to be outraged about, the MAGA crowd keeps it unfocused. What's woke? It's whatever it needs to be for the time and place. Who is in the Soros Cabal? Whoever needs to be for the particular discussion at the moment.

But it's important to remember that the MAGA crowd feeds into something that can be traced even further back. There's an ongoing dogma about vaccines that's roughly the equal to the myth of the Inuit having 400 words for snow. Note, the Inuit DO NOT have 400 words for snow. But like anything, once something gets started, it becomes really hard to shake. The dogma of antivaxxers relies on three components:

• An uncertainty about the makeup of a vaccine — Which may be heard as folks citing the Tuskegee experiments or the CIA experiments.
• A lack of widespread evidence showing what a lack of vaccines looks like — At one point everyone knew what Polio looked like and now through the success of the vaccine, almost nobody has any real understanding of what Polio actually looks like or what it can do.
• A lack of real risk analysis — Actual death from Childhood vaccines is almost unheard of at this point, compared to the 0.12 ‰
  who will die from measles. A lot of folks don't even know what ‰ means. Additionally, a lot of people do not know the history behind the VAERS database, nor are aware that the funding allocation from Congress to arrest anyone who makes a false report is currently $0 and has been that rate since it's inception.

These things sow a level of distrust and when paired with the rapacious nature that is the American healthcare system, there is massive amounts of gasoline being poured by folks who are interested in profits, that contrarians, shysters, and grifters are more than happy to ignite to further their agenda. We didn't just get here by ignorance, we got here by a bunch of folks who would use that ignorance for their own gains. Like Andrew Wakefield, so many antivaxers I know indicate his research while casually omitting that he had published that paper in order to enact an elaborate fraud. The idea was to get people to select his "safe" version of the MMR vaccines that would have made him a ton of profit. Nor do people speak about Brian Deer who did the investigative research and reporting that eventually undid, at least in a legal sense and brought about his removal as a licensed doctor, Andrew Wakefield's report. No what most people remember is that Wakefield published a report and there's been this sorting of those who bought into it and those who didn't. And all of that was on the background of Autism, a disease that initially no one had any idea existed which feeds into that whole FUD.

The MAGA crowd has made it political. Lots of people are wondering about that "medical record" and why tax payer money can only be unlocked by the public on condition that they take a shot. That latter part was predicated on the notion that everyone at one point knew that they did NOT want to catch any disease that the MMR shot protected against. And if you've ever talked to any "sovereign citizen" type, you can just take that mentality and extend it to say "roads". Why predicate having a license on the ability to use a road one paid for? Why pay for it? Why think taxes are legal? It's road for sure, but there's lot of similarities along the way.

There's a level of contempt for our Government. I mean just look around, one wouldn't be hard pressed to find a clear example. There's been a lot of failure globally in Democratic order because quite a few are more interested in profit to be made than benefit to society. The thing with the antivaxxers is they've taken that contempt and made choices and commitments that are dangerous for themselves, their children, and their locality. They've allow that contempt to be woven into an identity and there are all kinds of agents out there that will validate that identity in exchange for profit or power. But we should remember that if we are going to simplify it, those are the true drivers.

Maybe I'm not Rusting enough.

Part of the problem here is that Bezos, who is and always will be a dork who became rich by selling books

Bezos is not rich because of the shit he sells on his website, that shit is just a bonfire for cash. Bozos is rich because a hint over 40% of the entire fucking Internet runs on Amazon Web Services.

This is why if AWS and Amazon were ever split by the Federal government, Amazon and all the warehouse shit would be bankrupt faster than the morals of a newly elected politician.

The thing is these idiots play dumb games.

One of the reasons we did that whole war thing for independence was specifically because there was this King guy who was head of the Church and State. And the big problemo with the King being that way was when say Religious cult group A had their King, Religious cult group B would get persecuted. And then of course round and round we go with that.

Not to mention that our Country was already pretty aware of what "just a little bit of mixing religion and legislation" would ultimately end up as. For a concrete example, if anyone is wondering, the notion behind Members of Congress buying stocks is so that they could reap the economy they created win or lose. And we all see how awesome and not completely off the rails that went. So, imagine how that's working for us all with Stocks, and then just replace stocks with INSERT ONE OF THOSE RELIGIONS HERE. It'll be F-U-N times for sure.

But here's the bigger catch. All of them already know that. They think that their Religious cult group will be the one that comes out on top and if not, they'll be able to just slide on into whatever religious cult group takes over. Sorta how all the Republicans were against crazy ass politics until they saw that they could fucking cash in on it. But then they can only cash in on it until they can no longer cash in on it and the crazy party turns on them.

That's the fun thing about bombastic politics. At some point, someone WAY MORE BOMBASTIC than you comes around and drinks your milkshake. And surprise, the Founding Fathers already knew all of this, the USA distinctly does not have a monopoly on crazy ass shit going on in official government business. And so Speaker Johnson is sitting there acting like "Oh yeah, I'm totally not going to be some mindless jerk who'll be the first against the wall when the religious revolution comes." And the thing is, is he's a stepping stone like many of the dumb ass bombastic Republicans. He will absolutely be "some mindless jerk who was the first against the wall when the religious revolution came." They will absolutely Mike Pence his ass.

That's the ignorance of these fuckers. They think they'll somehow bubble up into the winner's circle, and in reality he's just breakfast for some even bigger fish that's looking for Speaker Johnson to open the box and let loose. You all saw it. Second shit got real on January 6th, all those true Trumpers started getting into "mad dash for the door" mode. You saw them right after when they came back to debate votes, everyone's voice cracking, nerves frayed, folks aren't coming to the lectern with the same kind of passion. About to be literally ripped apart by a hundred hands pulling you in every direction does that to a person. They talk big game, they want to open doors that shouldn't be open, but suddenly when they realize they're not going to make it to the glorious nation they were trying to make… Oh I think enough is enough suddenly.

Which by the way, you can tell by the way Graham is talking there and how he was talking earlier before he almost became a Senator hamburger, he was fucking spooked. Shame that lesson only lasted him about a week. They all don't know it, but they all are going to get themselves killed by the very people they were trying to empower. They ain't powerful men, they're pawns.

Remember. He is a felon. That means he cannot vote in an election, but he absolutely can be elected to created laws. It's so weird thinking about that out loud.

arguing that the founding fathers wanted faith to be a “big part” of government

No they didn't. They came from a nation where the King was head of State and Church. That was literally one of the things they absolutely DID NOT want in the next form of government.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between Church & State.

— Thomas Jefferson (1802)

There needs to be an understanding that many founding fathers of this nation wanted religion to be between themselves and their chosen god. Because there isn't a "establish religion within Government" that's what foolish people think it always ends as "Government establishing religion".

Like we could have Members of Congress that establish laws and participate within the marketplace they have created, come win or lose. However, we know that instead Members of Congress manipulate the market solely for wins at the loss to others.

If Congress cannot help themselves to be greedy when given a free market, what makes anyone think that they won't outright dictate religion if given the chance? And the answer is, they wouldn't. That's why there is a separation. Given the chance, if enough Baptist got into power, they would absolutely outlaw Catholics.

The Founding Fathers weren't idiots. They absolutely held tight to the "power corrupts but absolute power corrupts absolutely." Any time a government is handed the power to mix religion and law, that law turns into dictating religion. That's why there is a separation. So we don't have to go Salem Witch hunting folks based on which definition of the Trinity they hold to.

They all think this moment of peace between the various Christianities will just last until forever, not realizing that the reason there is this peace is because all of the various flavors get treated equally. Change that equation and we're right back to the 1600s where we've got one cult trying to murder and outlaw the others.

These idiots have zero idea what they are clamoring for. They think their team, should the equality barrier get taken away, will be the one that wins out. And it's likely that enough zealots exist that Speaker Johnson would be burned at the stake for some odd reason his version of God isn't the correct one. Or even worse, Speaker Johnson's version get outlawed so it'll be legal and cool to burn him at the stake.

Like how bad does one have to fail at history to not understand this point?

Actually it looks to be a regulatory grab.

The legislation mandates that any entity looking to sell lab-grown meat in the state must obtain future authorization from the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, allowing the department to adopt rules governing the use of lab-grown meat in the state.

Likely they want to pose a different tax on lab meat than other meat. Doing so usually is to provide a method to pander to farmer votes later on down the road. It's like the reason things like corn subsidies seem to just never go away.

So this just looks like the person is creating a new card for the deck of cards to be played during elections. But I guess "woke" can be in there too if that plays well to his base.

The government’s main witness, Sidney Powell, just cleared Rudy Giuliani from any involvement in a conspiracy by making it unequivocally clear that Rudy Giuliani told her that he would never work with her on anything, under any circumstances

— Ted Goodman, political adviser to Giuliani

youkeepusingthatwordidonotthinkitmeanswhatyouthinkitmeansmeme.gif

Because not working with one person is the same thing as precluding literally everyone on the planet.

This is talking about household formation. Basically, the rate at which a population creates people who will demand housing. How they obtain that housing is not a data point. It's just basically a question of "do you want a place to call your own?" Which is why this article is so full of shit. It's basically indicating that "if millennials just stopped demanding housing, prices would go down."

So if a millennial is sitting there in their parent's house and going "fuck this, I'm getting an apartment", that's increasing this value. They don't actually need to buy a house, they could rent it, that would still be forming a new household.

It just begs the question of what the fuck is this author trying to get at? Should millennial's parents have been fucking less? Should millennial's just build a single house commune? Should millennial's just start offing themselves? This article is a giant pile of boomer bullshit.

to tweak a chicken gene that is responsible for producing the protein ANP32A

The authors identified two other related proteins, ANP32B and ANP32E, that they think would prevent virus replication

Yeah you cannot just keep taking out Phosphoprotein 32 from an animal. It's literally used widely by the body (human and chicken) to prevent tumors from growing.

For broiler chickens, which live only eight to 12 weeks before they are slaughtered, the health effects of gene editing may not have time to manifest

This is like that modern problems require modern solutions meme. Chickens developing cancer too quickly? Just kill them off faster. I mean, I guess that'll technically work, I leave the ethical discussion to the vegans out there. But yeah, hauling out ANP32's various families, you're going to get chickens that have a lot of knotty meat.

But laying chickens are kept commercially for two to three years

CHUCKLES Oh yeah, you absolutely could not do this for them. LOL. That would be an unspeakable horror.

This disease is so prevalent and so important that any strategies that we can bring together to help protect the health of the birds is, in my view, very good

And she's not wrong. Avian flu isn't some shit we need to be playing around with. It's something we should be taking an active role on. I'd vote perhaps better facilities for housing the chickens and better care compared to the conditions most chicken live in today, the vegans might indicate dropping chicken altogether, and these folks have a "creative" to say the least, way of tackling it. There might be some middle ground somewhere in there, but the more important thing is we really need to get on top of this avian flu bullshit and I, for one, am open to ideas that aim for that goal reasonably.

Agree to disagree. I find the Kamala Kahn character to be an effervescent relief to a series that's taking itself way too seriously or trying too hard for slap stick. Does that make this particular movie great? No. The movie itself is a pretty flimsy plot. The main trope of the movie is someone makes a mistake, the group comes together to resolve the mistake, and develop themselves during that resolution. So with that said, it's not really good at delivering that, it's not Trolls bad (the original one which the plot sucks, the music is quite good) but yeah there was a lot of room for lots of character development that was just not included in what was delivered. To me the movie pulled its punches on what it could have delivered.

But in these kinds of tropes you see classic character stereotype traits, in this case Kamala Kahn plays the lighthearted comedic foil and does so quite well through the movie. Needless to say the Captain Marvel character is our person who brings the conflict to be resolved and towards the end you are left with a pretty unsatisfying result. Like the issue is indeed resolved, but it's about as exciting as how I might feel when I've completed my taxes. Hooray, I got that done. Maria Rambeau is our power character consistently pushing the accelerator for the characters to resolve the matter. And she's pretty good at it, but there was absolutely more opportunity for her to flesh that out that they kept sacking her personal past to keep that in check. Which at some point one might go, yeah we get it, she's troubled and doesn't want to talk about it. There's a degree of too much "I'm the aloof character in this movie". I will say the final fight scene is actually good for the level of just skirting the level of frenetic and follow-ability. I've gotten to a point where I just tune out superhero fights when it just becomes a lightshow and camera pandemonium (ala the most recent Ant Man movie).

Like I said, it's not a horrible movie. I went to the 10am showing of it on Friday (with one other friend) and that was $40 and that's where I would say "Do NOT go see this movie for $40". But I really enjoy the Kamala Kahn character and the level of energy the actress brings to the character. It reminds me a bit of how bubbly my twenty-two year old niece is sometimes and that serves as a nice refresher given the backdrop of generally everything else. So, I will acquiescence, there's a likely bias on my part for the character.

Again, absolutely not disagreeing with your position on the character. I think Marvel (and this touches just every so slightly on the superhero saturation) has gotten so big that not every character is going to be widely welcomed by everyone. I think there's a point that the Marvel Superhero movies get so numerous that you have to start considering sub-genres for the movies. And perhaps Marvel should pull back a bit on the distribution (it's their ship ultimately to sail and sink if need be). But I really enjoyed the Kamala Kahn character in the same way that I enjoyed the Katy character from the Shang-Chi movie. I good comedic foil is like pepper, you need just enough to flavor the food and not too much to over power the food and both of those characters have carried that role quite well thus far. But like anything, Disney has every chance to run that straight into the ground.

So just my two cents.

You're right, it's 18 USC § 922 (n) that covers the other way around.

(n) It shall be unlawful for any person who is under indictment for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce any firearm or ammunition or receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

I totally got ahead of myself pasting the related law. Thank you for your keen eyes.

18 USC § 922 (d)(1)

(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that such person, including as a juvenile

(1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year

For those wondering.

EDIT: This is incorrect. It is 18 USC § 922 (n) as indicated by my reply to @Neato and thanks to them for pointing out my error.