Brave is the one run by transphobes who also love crypto.

How would you drive the adoption of such a protocol in an environment that is largely hostile towards attempts at demonetising things?

‘Calling out lies’ isn’t fact-checking - at best it would have turned into a ‘your word against mine, who will people believe’ mudslinging contest. Fact-checking puts the onus on the person telling the lie to correct it - ‘this is false and here is a source that says so’.

To run a debate with Trump and without live fact checking was just plain stupid. You know he’s just going to run his rehearsed talking points without so much as trying to answer even mildly uncomfortable questions. They not only let him get away with serial lying, they basically laid the groundwork so he could get away with it.

Fact checks after the fact never reach the people that need to see them.

That’s the thing. Apple has that track record already. This years iOS update will be available for phones released as far back as 2017. And that’s not a recent development - 4+ years have been the norm with iOS devices for a long time, while many Android phones have suffered from much faster obsolescence.

Google have yet to prove that they can fulfill this promise.

I’ll touch base with you in 7 years to see how that’s going.

*from the manufacturer

Does your Android phone get 5+ years of software support?

deleted by creator

What’s giving me dementia is the fact that so many Americans want this guy to be president. Again.

The difference is, Devops isn’t a bubble that everyone is waiting for to pop. I’ve been in that field for over ten years now, and properly implemented it is a net gain for everyone who does it. The reason companies are falling over themselves trying to hire ‘Devops’ is because they still haven’t properly cottoned on to the concept but are afraid of falling behind. And yes, I can absolutely attest to the fact that Devops is a tough market to hire in at the moment, that there are a lot of places who don’t have the first clue about what Devops really is, and - similarly to Agile - think they can add some buzzwords to their toolchain and call Bob their uncle. And there are a lot of candidates who somehow acquired a Devopsy title in all that chaos, but all their CVs have are tech buzzwords, and when you interview them they’re clueless. That doesn’t change the fact that Devops is a solid concept with high benefits for those who understand it.

AI, and more specifically GenAI and LLMs - is more like crypto, in the sense that people are trying to get rich from it without having the first clue what it is. It’s this shiny new thing that everyone is rushing to get on board with, but I have yet to see someone propose a use case that actually makes sense, couldn’t be implemented better without AI, and is a net gain for those using it. Right now it’s all this nebulous bullshit, everyone just slaps their own coat of paint onto ChatGPT and calls it a day. Useful AI-adjacent concepts like Big Data and Machine Learning have been around for much longer than the tooling underpinning the current hype, and already have a lot of very valid use cases.

By the way, I work with a bunch of high aptitude Devops engineers and none of them are thinking about adding AI to our pipelines, not even to pad their CV.

So not only do they want AI to take your job - you also won’t be able to get another job if you don’t wholesale buy into this shit.

I love the future.

The worst is when they say they’ve found a solution, without adding any information or elaborating further. Makes me want to flip my desk.

But where are they offering it? Big cities and densely populated areas where people have options and therefore won’t swarm to the product? Or are they offering it in small, remote towns where there’s not a lot of competition?

Where I live, mobile home internet is not available outside of metro areas and larger cities, and in the regions mobile towers are chronically underprovisioned and overloaded.

I don’t actually have any particular problem with that. So he dabbled in Goth - nothing wrong with it. I’ve been around that particular block, and the Goths I’ve met were very nice people. I’ve had my own leather and medieval phases, and am not embarrassed about them. If anything, they taught me a bit about variety and individuality, and helped make me the person I am today. Maybe if Musk had actually leaned into it properly and allowed himself to explore that or another niche space, maybe even find himself in it, he might be a bit more balanced and happy today.

‘Mass murder’ is not a ‘good idea’ in any context.

I literally never saw Musk as a real life Tony Stark. He always was more or less ‘some tech executive’ to me, but my perception of him change to ‘toxic shithead’ the moment he lashed out at people criticising his submarine idea.

Net neutrality isn’t going to do a thing about this kind of stuff. In a best case scenario, you’ll end up with overall data usage limitations - no more ‘unlimited mobile data’.

ISPs meter data usage because it’s pretty much the only way they can impose some form of limitation on a finite capacity to provide such data to you and other customers - other than data rate limits (read: slower speeds). They can’t guarantee data rates in almost any setup, because ultimately, while ‘data usage’ is a bit of an artificial construct and ‘data’ is not in any way finite, the pipes that deliver the data certainly are of finite capacity. Mobile data capacity - and in fact, any wireless medium - is a shared medium, the more people try to use it simultaneously, the less pleasant it’s going to be for each individual user. Ask Starlink users in many US areas how overselling limited capacity impacts the individual user.

Mobile data usage also has different usage patterns than if you’re hotspotting your PC. You’re not going to download massive games or other bandwidth hogs to your mobile. You probably won’t be running a torrent client either. So they can give you unlimited mobile data because you’re simply not going to put as much of a strain on the infrastructure with pure on-device usage than you will with hotspotting.

This isn’t a defense of what AT&T is doing. But net neutrality isn’t going to force them to suddenly be all ethical. It’s not going to make them provision infrastructure that doesn’t fall over at the first signs of higher-than-usual load. And it certainly can’t change the physical realities of wireless data communication. In an ideal world ISPs wouldn’t be so greedy and/or beholden to greedy shareholders to be cutting corners, and instead provide sufficient infrastructure that can handle high demand.

And to those who are talking about their workarounds: you may not like it but you’ve signed a contract. That contract stipulates acceptable use, and if you’re found to be breaching the contract terms, the other party is within their rights to terminate the contract. Again, in an ideal world these contract terms would be more balanced towards the needs of the customer, but in the meantime your best recourse against unfavourable contract terms is to take your business elsewhere. And if you can’t do that, everything else is at your own risk.

Except there is no ‘unlimited’ for water or electricity.

It’s more likely that the rich already have all the luxury cars they want, and are looking for other ways to flaunt their wealth.

I’ve never known a rich person to be so self-conscious as to experience this kind of ‘emotional sensitivity’.