Oh they definitely exist. At a high level the bullshit is driven by malicious greed, but there are also people who are naive and ignorant and hopeful enough to hear that drivel and truly believe in it.

Like when Microsoft shoves GPT4 into notepad.exe. Obviously a terrible terrible product from a UX/CX perspective. But also, extremely expensive for Microsoft right? They don’t gain anything by stuffing their products with useless annoying features that eat expensive cloud compute like a kid eats candy. That only happens because their management people truly believe, honest to god, that this is a sound business strategy, which would only be the case if they are completely misunderstanding what GPT4 is and could be and actually think that future improvements would be so great that there is a path to mass monetization somehow.

My gut feeling was that a standard accessibility protocol doesn’t exist yet, but that a Wayland extension is probably the solution.

Looks like I was right: https://blogs.gnome.org/a11y/2024/06/18/update-on-newton-the-wayland-native-accessibility-project/

However that’s a recent proof-of-concept, so nothing generally available at this stage. Details would have to be ironed out, changes upstreamed, the protocol extension accepted, and every graphics toolkit would have to be updated to support the protocol. Seems like a very worthy goal to pursue though and it’s great to see funds allocated for a11y.

I don’t know how that would work with XWayland apps, but given how clunky that gets with stuff like fractional scaling I wouldn’t get my hopes up. The sooner we can native Wayland all the things, the better. X11 must die, regardless of the feeling of the graybeards on the matter.

I’m not a revolutionary and I disagree that the semantic difference is unimportant.

“The system must be destroyed” implies, assuming we’re talking about national politics, at the very least a short period of very deep constitutional and institutional reform, but really refers to nothing less than civil war, violent revolution, and the systematic dismantlement of existing institutions from which proponents of such action generally assume that their preferred method of government will naturally emerge.

This is opposed to a belief that, flawed may they be, democratic institutions also act as safeguards against the tyranny of the majority as well as the tyranny of whoever has the most money/guns, and slow incremental change to these institutions is preferable to their dismantlement.

Of course everything in the world isn’t so black and white. Nonetheless the existence of gray doesn’t diminish the difference between black and white. “The system must be destroyed”, by virtue of the violence it implies, is an extremist statement and different in nature to “the system must be fixed”.

The FBI apparently learned some lessons on how to deal with Russian interference since 2016 and made some arrests this time around. Way too little too late though, and in January Trump’s cronies will take over and that’ll be that. Other countries should take notes though and start being much harsher on Russian trolls and their puppets. Unfortunately Von Der Layen recently fired the guy who was prosecuting Musk over Twitter so I’m not too confident anyone in power learned their lesson. Which is mind-boggling because russian-backed far-right parties are a meaningful electoral threat to people like Von Der Layen.

I mean, she did try other things as well and that characterization is a bit reductive. More correctly I think we can say that “she’s not him” is the only thing the Sanders->Cheney spectrum could ever agree on and nothing else she did “stuck”. Sanders wasn’t happy about the pro-israel stuff and Cheney probably wasn’t happy about the “tax the rich” stuff.

Choosing one clear ideology and sticking to it might sound great to the progressives on here (and to people like Hasan), but I don’t have the hubris to think she or anyone within the Democratic party establishment actually had the charisma to pull that off either (maybe Michele Obama but she didn’t wanna do it so that’s the end of that plan). Especially considering Harris had like 4 months to pull a campaign together and did not have any previous popular good will to rely on.

4 months is very short and no matter how right you play your cards a lot of voters will not know anything about you other than “she’s not Him”. Sometimes you can do everything right and still lose (not that she did everything right but I think a postmortem will need to look back way further than that at Biden and Hillary and those who supported them).

Everyone from Sanders to Dick fucking Cheney endorsed Harris. Anyone who was paying any attention and wasn’t a literal fascist voted for her. The direction of the swing seems irrelevant.

The swing fell short because it’s not so much about direction than strength. Macron in 2017 ran the most “hard center” presidential campaign imaginable. Difference is it worked, not because his centrist program was particularly novel but in large part because he is a very charismatic figure and managed to create a voting base of hopefuls for himself. The same can broadly be argued about Obama (whose first act as president was to essentially absolve the previous administration and Wall St of their many sins in case anyone forgot how moderate he was).

Harris ran on a platform of… “I’m not him”. Which to any reasonable person is an obvious “yeah OK”, but unfortunately most Americans are apathetic cretins who will refuse to move their asses to a polling station if the guy on the telly doesn’t promise them a blowie at the voting booth. And the Democrat establishment is simultaneously too big to fail and incapable of producing an actually charismatic leader.

Well, all that and the obvious election interference from Musk, Putin, and the ontological inability of traditional media not to platform literal fascists.

Don’t forget about the regular capitalists. Many of the richest German industrialists today are direct heirs of Nazis who actively helped Hitler gain power, built a personal empire from slave labor, faced no consequences for their actions, and were allowed to keep operating after the war.

Well… It’s English. Y’all’s vowels are 90 % schwa and half of the rest is completely dependent on the accent.

“Cuh-stuh-muh”. Same vowel. If English’s spelling was to be redone, I vote for a hangul-style writing system but with the vowels only implied: kx/stx/mx.

Like most conspiracy theories, there is a huge grain of truth there. Bush should have done 9/11 because it benefitted him in literally every way. Yet he did not.

Today’s WaPo scandal illustrates the more real situation quite well: usually the billionaires take a mostly hands-off approach to owning a paper. They don’t need to meddle. The journalists are ontologically incapable of being truly disruptive regardless of if the paper is owned by Bezos or funded by an independent government committee. That Bezos presumably felt the need to prevent the WaPo from endorsing Harris was unusual and a big enough deal for the journalists to raise a big stink. And as someone who lives in a country that has a strong tradition of independent and state-funded journalism (that doesn’t shy away from criticizing the government)… I can tell you it’s not very different from the rest. Certainly not as left-wing as it gets, and just as vulnerable to the fallacies I described.

That is not to say there is no outright corruption of big prestigious papers, or that oligarchs owning the press isn’t a massive, glaring threat to Democracy. But beware of oversimplifying such issues. For one because you might regret making such sweeping statements when the billionaires actually decide to wield their power, Murdoch style. And for two because you might be disappointed to find that prestigious independently owned papers aren’t so much better. Don’t expect them to start printing Marxist pamphlets any time soon if that’s what you are into.

The French in the '90s had Daft Punk and the Minitel.

Après moi je dis ça je ne dis rien.

The truth is not better but there’s some nuance. Major media do not usually care about being for or against fascism. They care about clicks, and following “journalistic ethics” that boil down to Enlightened Centrism™ and bothsidesism.

Their billionaire owners don’t even have to interfere (most of the time). The system self-selects to make money through a shared set of beliefs in what constitutes “proper journalism”. This makes journalists, as a profession, ontologically incapable of fighting against fascists. They truly, honestly, firmly believe that “Fascist about to win US Presidency” is not a statement of fact.

It’s the same ideological pitfalls that makes Serious Media pit science against whichever anti-science fad is trendy right now. Vaccines, “climatic skepticism”, etc. anything goes and the journalists in charge truly genuinely from their heart believe that is a fair and balanced approach.

Not to say there aren’t actual conspiracies from time to time of course, but even actual independent traditional journalism has generally failed to accurately report on the rise of fascism.

That’s simultaneously a shit-ton of money and not that much money.

$100k, which would be successful lifetime sales numbers for a smallish indie game (an industry where the upfront capital requirements are as low as they get, you only need skills and time) is just an IT consultant’s gross yearly revenue, a couple “medium-high effort” B2B contracts for an SME, or around a month of OpEx for a decent McDonald’s franchisee.

Not to say big corps don’t severely exploit creatives for profit. But I also do not believe that solving that particular issue would solve artists’ precarity. The entertainment industry just isn’t profitable enough to sustain everyone’s wish to work in a creative field.

The people doing this kind of bullshit are either children or fascists. They aren’t interested in “healthy debate” with you. They are lashing out at the Great Woke Bogeyman.

Honestly we should be relieved that the time these brainrotted fascists spend vandalizing Wikipedia isn’t spent sending rape or death threats to the developers, which is usually how these witch-hunts on “woke” go.

The lack of even the most basic understanding of parliamentary politics flying around in this thread is appalling, but certainly illustrates the reason why there are so many wild takes flying around on Lemmy.

To summarize:

• The right got a 2/3rds majority in parliament. The united left had the most votes of any individual group, but that’s only around 1/3 total.
• The reason the left proclaimed they “won” is they came “first” and thought the center-right party would ally with them rather than the “hard right” (welp)
• That, in isolation (!), isn’t antidemoratic. A majority of French representatives (presumably) approve of the government. Simple maths. A government can only govern with the approval of parliament, it literally can’t work otherwise.
• However the French voting system very strongly relies on strategic voting, and the far-right came very close to having a parliamentary majority. Therefore the center-right party only got the seats they did because everybody left of the far-right made electoral agreements to pull out their candidates so only the candidate with the most chances to win against the far right would be running. This heavily benefited the center-right party who then allied with the hard right, which is being perceived as treason (for lots of reasons that I’m not going to get into). Strategic voting is a democratic failures and leads to suboptimal choices for representatives (thought that is still miles better than whatever the fuck the CCP is doing, since apparently that needs saying on here). Furthermore this whole shift to the right certainly isn’t going to help with the socio-economic issues and is going to end up benefiting the far-right.

Those ones are still under litigation AFAIK. Last I heard about it they lost their latest court case but it will be years before it reaches the top EU courts or an amendment is made to the GDPR.

I have uBlock Origin but didn’t bother configuring any additional filters. My desktop has consent-o-matic as well I think (which unlike a filter actually auto-rejects the tracking stuff).

However on a new profile (no extensions) I didn’t get the prompt, and neither did I on chromium. Just checked on windows as well, still not prompt. So it seems to just not prompt on desktop for some reason… I wonder if that means the tracking is disabled or they just auto-consent.

Unrelated to the article itself but I initially clicked on mobile and was presented with this clearly GDPR-violating prompt:

Where’s the button to reject tracking? It doesn’t exist.

For reference this is the correct prompt on admiral’s own website:

First time I see GDPR violation this brazen. While writing this comment I finally figured out how to reject consent (clicking on “Purposes” and manually deselecting each purpose).

I double checked with remote debugging, the button is not just hidden in CSS; it’s missing entirely:

For some reason I don’t get a consent prompt at all from my desktop even on a brand new firefox profile – perhaps because of my user-agent?

Anyways I felt motivated today so I’ve sent an email to their Data Protection Officer and set a reminder for next month in case they ghost me.

It’s so easy to tell this map was made by a Brit. Wales gets its own color (despite largely not speaking Welsh) but Belgium and Switzerland are monochrome (despite having multiple federally recognized and geographically partitioned monolinguistic regions and their own flavors of historical-but-rarely-spoken language)?

Only the Bri’ish would be haughty enough to assume their flavour of federal governance is so unique.

(I don’t actually care, it’s just very interesting how even such an innocent map actually shows a strong political/cultural bias)

ls -l /proc/xxx/{fd,syscall}

Camera pans down to resource locks hiding under the floorboards

To your last point: I don’t think it’s hard to figure out.

Unlike many people I don’t always have an inner monologue. Like, right now I’m writing so I “hear” the words I’m putting on my screen. But if I’m programming or doing some other complex abstract thought? No sentence there, only a flow of abstract thoughts (words, images, nameless concepts, feelings, intuition, all meshing together in a way that is unique to my brain and would take several paragraphs to adequately explain). This occasionally makes it… challenging to communicate an idea I just had, because my thinking runs parallel to my formulating and going from one to the other is a significant mental overhead.

For sure language does play some structuring role in how I see the world. But there are lots of thoughts I have which aren’t ever framed by language, and I imagine if I didn’t speak any language that’s how all my thoughts would be. Although that would obviously be very limiting, it certainly doesn’t sound alien to me.