This is a prime example of the fallacy fallacy, and maybe also ad hominem.

The fact that someone says ridiculous things like "women are dishwashers", doesn't mean that their thesis "there is a male loneliness epidemic", is incorrect. Additionally, if their arguments are completely wrong, it doesn't automatically mean their thesis is wrong.

Furthermore, I personally do think that there's a male loneliness epidemic. While people like Andrew Tate are definitely having a bad influence, we should think, "why are these people popular? What draws young men to listen to misogynists?". And the reason (I think), is because young men are simply neglected by society, and are generally quite lonely. As a young man myself, I think it is actually kind of hard to make friends. Other men expect me to be "masculine" (aka, be an asshole, be tough, etc.) and simultaneously I'm very reluctant to make friends with women, because I'm kind of scared of falsely being accused of sexual harassment.

I feel like if I say or do the wrong thing (which excludes physically harassing someone), there's a risk of a woman completely ruining my life by simply accusing me of harassing her. And while the accusation might not become a proper conviction (or even prosecution), the accusation itself is already incredibly harmful for my reputation.

So to avoid that altogether, I simply avoid women in general. Or at least, I don't approach them. I don't talk to them, unless they talk to me first. Because if I make the wrong move, if I look at them the wrong way, my life might already be over.

Does this mean I hate women? No. It simply means I hate how people immediately jump to conclusions when they read "man accused of harassing a woman". Personally, when I read that headline, I don't immediately think less of that man, unless he's been found guilty of it.

Does this make me an incel? I don't really know; I don't think I'm owed sex in any way, and I don't think women inherently hate me the moment they see me. I do wish I could have a more feminine friend circle, because it's currently all men. But yeah, I think things are kinda fucked up right now, but simultaneously I honestly don't really know what I (or we as a society) could do to fix this.

So the price to kill someone is 4.75 million? Got it.

As long as the actual people in charge (read: CEO, CTO, CFO, anyone else on the board of directors and any other executives) aren't held directly responsible with a proper punishment that isn't payment, the killing of people is literally just a fee of 4.75 million dollars.

Sounds good, but they first need to actually deliver the jets, because this is otherwise pointless.

Tip: if you have an Android TV, you can install SmartTube as an alternative, privacy-friendly YouTube client. It has no ads and sponsorblock integration

Honestly, I'm not really excited about the past couple of major Nextcloud releases.

Mainly because there's still one big issue for small-scale Nextcloud servers: performance.

Mainly the web UI is still too slow for me to properly use, which is why I don't use it at all (unless I have to update an app).

It's a bit disappointing that they're mainly focused on the large enterprise customers instead of small hobbyists like me, but it's still understandable; after all, their income is mainly from the enterprise customers, not from selfhosters.

I also don't really like how they've jumped on the AI hypetrain instead of improving performance. But once again, I guess this generates more income for them than focusing on other things like improving performance.

I'd recommend everyone to archive their pages through the Internet Archive instead, as that non-profit seems to be more concerned with ethics than corporations such as Google.

RETURN THE FOX

Docker is a container manager, but that doesn't say anything if you don't know what containers are.

Containers are basically isolated apps. For example, take something like Nextcloud. Nextcloud can run in a Docker container, which means that it runs in an isolated environment completely separated from the user's system. If Nextcloud breaks, the user's server won't be affected at all, because it's running isolated.

Why is this useful? Well, it's useful because dependencies and such automatically update. Nextcloud for example, is dependent on PHP and if you install Nextcloud directly on your server, you'll need to ensure that PHP 8 has been installed and set up properly. If PHP (or the required PHP extensions) aren't properly installed, Nextcloud won't work. Or, maybe if there's a Nextcloud update that requires a new version of PHP (PHP 9 or 10 in the future), you'll have to manually update PHP to the newer version.

All that dependency management is completely gone with containers. The container itself automatically installs and sets up a proper environment for the app that's running. So in the case of Nextcloud, the PHP binaries, extensions, and all the other stuff is all automatically included without the developer having to do anything at all. Just run one command and your entire Nextcloud instance is automatically updated.

I usually keep my phone until it has degraded / become so incredibly slow, that I can't use it properly anymore.

You can use this but it doesn't really download directly from Spotify. Instead, it takes the song name from Spotify, searches it on YouTube, downloads it from YouTube and then adds metadata from Spotify on the downloaded file.

Shameless self-plug, but I made a Python program that basically does the exact same thing, except it has a web ui. It's called MetaTube and it also supports other metadata providers, such as Musicbrainz and Deezer.

Yeah, we can support by making useful PRs and fixing bugs. Unfortunately, I don't know Rust, so I'll have to look into that first.

My ELI5 version:

Basically, the 'Web Environment Integrity' proposal is a new technique that verifies whether a visitor of a website is actually a human or a bot.

Currently, there are captchas where you need to select all the crosswalks, cars, bicycles, etc. which checks whether you're a bot, but this can sometimes be bypassed by the bots themselves.

This new 'Web Environment Integrity' thing goes as follows:

1. You visit a website
2. Website wants to know whether you're a human or a bot.
3. Your browser (or the 'client') will send request an 'environment attestation' from an 'attester'. This means that your browser (such as Firefox or Chrome) will request approval from some third-party (like Google or something) and the third-party (which is referred to as 'attester') will send your browser a message, which basically says 'This user is a bot' or 'This user is a human being'.
4. Your browser receives this message and will then send it to the website, together with the 'attester public key'. The 'attester public key' can be used by the website to verify whether the attester (a.k.a. the third-party checking whether you're a human or not) is trustworthy and will then check whether the attester says that you're a human or not.

I hope this clears things up and if I misinterpreted the GitHub explainer, please correct me.

The reason people (rightfully) worry about this, is because it gives attesters A LOT of power. If Google decides they don't like you, they won't tell the website that you're a human. Or maybe, if Google doesn't like the website you're trying to visit, they won't even cooperate with attesting. Lots of things can go wrong here.