• 4 Posts
  • 644 Comments
Joined 11 months ago
cake
Cake day: December 13th, 2024

help-circle




  • Constitutional amendments

    • adopt Kansas’ right to personal autonomy at the federal level to restore right to abortion
    • restrict natural rights to natural persons without including juridical persons such as corporations
    • revoke qualified immunity
    • enable recall elections at the federal level
    • switch to a Smith-efficient voting system, replace the electoral college with proportional representation
    • nullify decision that allows mandatory age verification to access online content
    • nullify decision to overturn Chevron deference doctrine

    Regulations

    • national policing standards including investigative interviewing that prohibits lying
    • legalize drugs
    • repeal FOSTA-SESTA
    • single-payer healthcare
    • achieve solvency of Social Security by increasing withholdings or taxes on all income or wealth & by eliminating taxable limits
    • decouple SNAP from the rest of the US farm bill, move SNAP from USDA to HHS, stop subsidizing agribusiness & protecting US sugar production
    • tax petrochemical industries for the full product lifecycle of plastics & gasoline
    • reduce spending on armed forces, close unnecessary bases in foreign territory
    • promote mass transit & rail over automotive transportation
    • reform income taxes so the government prefills forms, which you merely verify or correct before paying/getting a refund




  • Security vulnerabilities are different

    No, it’s still open source work, completely voluntary in the free world.

    Disclosures are often used so people are aware that they’re using libraries that the maintainer has refused to patch

    No, they merely tell reality: an unresolved security issue was found. How anyone handles that is their business. There is no inherent duty.

    People who would rather write a fix than write & maintain their own daunting library will send a fix.

    could lose actual funding they get

    If someone’s getting paid, and it’s not worth the work, then that is also their business. It’s still open source. If the solution saves more effort than doing it yourself, then the people who need it won’t just let it all go to waste.

    This is entirely a social issue of managing & rebuffing unrealistic expectations. It’s perfectly valid to set boundaries, remind folks beggars can’t be choosers, and tell them pitching in gets more done.


  • Again, ignoring/postponing is an option. At work, we’d just move that to the backlog of shit we may never touch: having it there is good for tracking the issue & gathering notes on our thoughts regarding it, which saves time approaching it like new each time it comes up. It’s no different for open source maintainers. Marking an item as won’t fix, deferred, or help wanted or closing redundant items isn’t much paperwork.

    Again, the objective reality is the defect exists, and that reality doesn’t change with our awareness of that fact: it’s better to know & track for planning even if the plan is to do nothing.


  • Human time costs resources, and human aren’t that energy efficient. Would it take more energy & resources for a person to inefficiently grind away at a task they dislike than for a machine that can perform it fairly quickly?

    There’s also opportunity cost, eg, shit we’d rather do. Time spent on an unwanted task is time we don’t get to spend on something better.

    Drawing’s been figured out by better artists, and there are better problems to solve that those artists absolutely suck at.







  • We sought legal advice, and unfortunately discovered that French law, specifically Article 6-I-7 of the Loi pour la Confiance dans l’Économie Numérique (LCEN), might actually require us to respond and apply blocking measures, at least for French users.

    That said, this whole situation shows just how inadequate this regulation is. Such decisions should be made by a court — a private company shouldn’t have to decide what counts as “illegal” content under threat of legal action.

    Good ol’ European governments exerting legitimate authority to protect civil liberties & information freedom. At least they had enough sense to stipulate penalties for manipulative reports:

    Art. 6-I-4 LCEN:

    1. Any person who presents content or activity to the persons referred to in paragraph 2 as being illegal with the aim of having it removed or its dissemination stopped, when they know this information to be inaccurate, shall be punished by one year’s imprisonment and a fine of €15,000.