Notices by Chris Gioran 💔 (chrisg@fosstodon.org)

@HeavenlyPossum It just blows my mind that the punishment for **funding terrorist groups** is $25m. That's it.

They behave as if Chiquita did this by accident and a fine makes it ok.

If this isn't the poster child for supporting the corporate death penalty, I don't know what is. And all the C-suite should go to jail to boot.

So as you say, if the state won't sponsor violence, its complicity will suffice.

@aral Our cluster munitions are made with 100% recycled depleted uranium.

This "greener satellite" crap reminds me of "environmentally friendly bombs" that occassionally make the news.

Because, you know, the reason people are against wars is the toxicity of the explosives.

My sister in Satan, we need fewer satellites, not greener ones.

Greenwashing the privatization of space, SMH.

"World's first wooden satellite could herald era of greener space exploration"

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-01456-z

@cmdr_nova

Not the most important thing, but this

> that even our experiments with the tech were confusing to users

In these people's minds, you're either an AI acolyte or you are "confused". There is no legitimate criticism.

@ZachWeinersmith ELIZA

@aral The problem with Jesus vision is when you see more bread and fish than what you actually have. Complicates grocery shopping.

Yesterday I heard, for the first time, the expression "software defined automobile industry" and I had to sit down for a second.

My sisters in Satan, a car needs to be reliable, cheap, repairable, clean, and eventually extinct.

But not software defined.

@aral Watching Facebook vs Fediverse is like watching a teen slasher film, where the protagonists _know_ who the killer is and they still invite him in the house because he hasn't killed any of them yet.

And you're just standing there, yelling at the screen, because you saw them watching him murder everyone else in the neighborhood.

Pro tip: If you can "legally justify" bombing a refugee camp, then the only conclusion is that your legal framework is inhuman and morally bankrupt.

@aral It could suck, wouldn't it?

How hard can it be to name it something else than ext7?

The year is 2030.

Computers boot directly into the browser. IDEs are just a web app now, running in the GPU. No one knows why. Or how.

All programs run in 4 nested containers on top of a hypervisor abstracting over the 5 major computational clouds. The last time a branch was predicted correctly, in any CPU anywhere, was 4 years ago.

Cloud costs are withdrawn directly from your retirement fund.

Ext7 just came out, it's written in Javascript and uses AI to guess what the file may contain.

I find it hilarious that the ToS update from #Zoom is assumed to be about training AI but it just as well could be about owning all of your stuff that goes through their service.

And there is no way to tell the difference.

Techbros: Here's the detailed technical plans for a working Torment Nexus.

Everyone: Building a Torment Nexus is a horrible idea.

Techbros: Why won't people focus on the technical merits of the proposal.

Mocking Google for their totally-not-an-attempt-to-DRM-the-Web is the right thing to do.

Open issues on the proposal repo and let them know what you think.

Politely.

But, don't be fooled. Even if they take this back, it doesn't change how they think. This is their intention. They just failed to slip it by this time.

The answer is to take power away from Google. Stop using their stuff. Build alternatives. It's not easy, but it's the only way.

And mock them. That's always fun.

@Chronotope

Yeah, ok, that's probably true. It's a small part of the whole story anyway, but it's fair to point out that it isn't necessarily nefarious.

@aral

@oblomov

I am certain their worldview is that any non technical comment is noise, so it doesn't surprise me that 1) they say this and 2) they genuinely believe it.

@jherazob @aral

@aral Closed as completed? Looks like a won't fix to me.

@jherazob

Google: Here's a proposal to DRM the entire web.
Everyone: We don't want you to DRM the entire web.
Google: The proposal is not final so you cannot judge it as an attempt to DRM the entire web.

@aral

@aral It's a small thing, but it caught my attention that this is under the repo of an individual contributor, not an "official" google account.

Shameful? I think so.