I was brought up on this harsh truth by my parents just like a lot of people, I assume, but I no longer believe it.

Sure, I believe we all owe it to ourselves and others to put hard work into the system, but there should be an inherent sense of fairness (or call it equality if you will, I don't want to get bogged down in the tedium of definitions right now). If the system is unfair, we should be working to make it more fair. It's not satisfactory to simply leave it as it is, broken, and tell everyone else to deal with it when they may not have the resources to do so.

I'm not saying you're wrong. I say I refuse. I do not believe.

KDE is Windows 98, full of fun customizations, but unpolished in odd ways no matter what you do.

Absolutely perfect. And part of why I've grown to love it.

Your initial post and response here describe my position as well.

Simply put, to follow individuals, you have to be where those individuals are. On Lemmy here in looking for topics and discussion, those are much easier to decentralize.

I was thinking about this the other day, one of my favorite analogies is seconds.

A million seconds is 12 days. A billion seconds is 31 years. A trillion seconds is ............ 31,688 years.

The analogy already breaks down, because while most people could understand 12 days and a lot of adults can understand 31 years for having lived it (some even twice or more!), 31,688 years is completely incomprehensible again. How many human generations is that? All of recorded human history is only like 5,000 years. It's utterly, mind-numbingly insane. No trillionaires, ever! No billionaires!!!

https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/17/business/elon-musk-richest-person-trillionaire/index.html

This was published on September 17th of this year, after most of the nonsense of Twitter and utter things. He's still on track, by 2027 no less. There's no telling how directly and flagrantly he'll benefit from a Trump win, either.

In response to a perfectly valid question about dumbass plan I just came up with:

"we'll burn that bridge when we come to it"

Is it actually finding new stuff, though? Or just refining classification methods to better identify what we already had lying around?

I'm right there with you.

Microsoft (and honestly a lot of mainstream software) has been slowly evolving over the years from providing robust, full-featured products that allow you build your own workflows to shipping things with an inherent "paradigm" or "ideology" on how they should be used. Mostly (unsurprisingly) to the ends of data collection, ad serving, and profit driving. Gross, gross, gross.

One of my favorite examples of this was playing The Legend of Zelda: Four Swords Adventure on the Gamecube back in they day. Me and a friend were really into it, but had trouble rounding up extra players. We got his little sister and an unwilling third friend to join. After about 30 minutes the unwilling friend, Marcus, gets bored with the game and starts sabotaging the rest of us. He'd run around smacking us with his sword making us drop rupees or refuse to stand where we needed him. That's honestly when it became fun for all of us, though.

The other three of us would plan out the room and then we'd figure out how to wrangle Marcus back into place. Someone would hold him so he couldn't go rogue and hit us while the others got in place to pull some levers before the wrangler would toss Marcus onto a pressure plate or something. He got to continue being a little bastard while we (slowly) made progress through the game. He eventually came around and helped us when it was absolutely necessary, but it was always clear it was just so he could keep being a bastard again. I really enjoy that asymmetrical style of gameplay and wish more things capitalized on it.

Also on the Gamecube of notable mention was Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles. Always fun when someone would get the personal mission of "take the most damage" and become a suicidal maniac in every encounter, much to everyone else's detriment. Ah the good old days.

But if I give them one of my nickels, what will I rub the other one against?

Am I missing something obvious here? What is motivating such stringent measures to be put in place when things have been sufficient without them thus far? Who is asking for this?

I live in my own little online echo chambers, but even I can't believe there's enough ground swell for the government to step in on ... What? Violence? Addiction? This is very confusing.

The original post was at least half joking in tone, but in seriousness, I think there's an argument to be made that "posts" applies to topical threads. Threads that originate with a piece of content like a link or self post and that all following discussion is at least tangentially related. I'd call them posts here on Lemmy for that.

Tweets, however, often originate out of thin air, be it someone's head or ass. When someone says, "Kanye West 'tweeted' " you've already determined about how seriously you're going to take it.

Maybe somebody can do a better job of boiling this down than I can.

Basically, right now, if you ask for something on the internet, it gets served to you. Sure there are lots of server side protections that may require an account to log in to access things or what have you, but still you can at least request something from a server and get some sort of response in return.

What this does is force attestation through a third party. I can ask for something from a server and the server turns to the attester and goes, "Hey, should I give this guy what he's asking for?" and the attester can say "No" for whatever reasons it might. Or worse yet, I can get the attestation but the server can then decide based in turn that it doesn't like me having that attestation and I get nothing.

You can make arguments that this would be good and useful, but it's so easy to see how this could go sideways and nobody with any sense should be taking Google or any of these large corporations at their word.