this has to be illegal.

like, no, seriously. i'm not a lawyer but i was working on a (since failed) startup in 2018 and distinctly remember how much headache the gdpr caused. literally one of the main things was that you cannot coerce users into consenting to data processing, or make features conditional to them. the gdpr makes a distinction between processing you do to perform a contract (that's why no one asks for your consent for processing your email address to log you in, that's implied) and processing you do for other reasons, which require user consent (that's why everyone asks if they can spam you on the same email -- it doesn't matter that your email address is already on their server, processing it for marketing reasons requires consent of the data subject). opting into these kinds of processing needs to be granular, if it's not they lose the validity of your consent.

i seriously hope facebook gets slapped so hard over this that no one ever thinks about doing this again. "paying with your data" should never be a thing in any society that calls itself civilized.

I thought the most dangerous one was president, at an 18% fatality rate (8 out of 45 so far)

actually, do yeet the baby if you have an application with different needs. for example, if you want to play a game, you're better off yeeting 60 babies a second and just hope that whoever is on the side catches enough of them to get a smooth stream of babies, than making sure every baby is handed gently to the next person and get the whole line clogged up the moment anything disrupts it. if you just use the yeetomatic 3000 you're always getting fresh babies on the other end, a few might just be dropped in the process

lmfao, frickin seriously? you're gonna build up an instance where the domain is part of all of your users' identities and you're not even gonna spend the $10/yr to keep that solid? with how much time goes into running a lemmy instance and not getting overrun by bots, that's an absolutely ridiculous assignment of resources

meanwhile, the eu: well we can't jail a company, so fuck you, if you break the gdpr you're liable for 4% of your yearly revenue (not profit, that can be cheated)

fines do work but only if they're relative to how much you make

yeah, the difference is pretty stark:

• lemmy: we'll give you a way to dm anyone on site, but please don't use that, if you set up an app on this other open source service we're not affiliated with (which is basically an encrypted discord) we'll do our best to make it as seamless for you as possible. we'll keep warning you for your own privacy.
• meta/facebook: aggressively keeps you on-platform for spying purposes; literally killed xmpp a decade ago and they'll fuckin do it again (if we let them)

They trust me. Dumb fucks.

- Mark Zuckerberg

(yes it sounds like satire but that's a real quote)

In theory, yes. In practice, nuclear plants that are shut off are almost always replaced with fossils, with the specific fossil fuel of choice often being coal.

Energy is not something where you can just pick one solution and run with it (at least, non-fossils, anyway). Nuclear is slow to ramp, so it usually takes care of baseline load. Renewables like wind and solar are situational, they mostly work throughout the day (yes, wind too, differential heating of earth's surface by the sun is what causes surface-level winds) and depend greatly on weather. Hydro is quite reliable but it's rarely available in the quantities needed. The cleanest grids on the planet use all of these, and throw in some fossils for load balancing, phasing them out with energy storage solutions as they become available.

You can't just shoot one of the pillars of this system of clean energy and then say you never tried to topple the system, just wanted to prop up the other pillars. Discussing shutting off nuclear plants without considering the alternative is pure lunacy, driven by fearmongering, and propped up by no small amounts of oil money for a reason.

Replacing nuclear with renewables is simply not the reality of the situation. Nuclear and renewables work together to replace fossils, and fill different roles. It's not one or the other, it's both and even together they're not yet enough.

So when you do consider the alternatives, moving from nuclear to the inevitable replacement, fossils, is still lunacy, just for other reasons: even if you care about nothing more than atmospheric radiation, coal puts more of it out per kWh generated, solely because of C-14 isotopes. Nuclear is shockingly clean, mostly due to its energy density, but also because it's not producing barrels of green goo, just small pills of spicy ceramics. And if your point is accidents, just how many oil spills have we had to endure? How many times was the frickin ocean set on fire? How many bloody and brutal wars were motivated by oil? Is that really what a safer energy source sounds like to you, just because there are two nuclear accidents the world knows about, and a thousand fossil accidents, of which the world lost count already?

And deflecting to other industries is also quite disingenuous. Especially if your scapegoat is transportation, since that's an industry that's increasingly getting electrified in an effort to make it cleaner at the same logistical capacity, and therefore will depend more and more on the very same electrical grid which you're trying to detract from.

yeah, honestly, i think the optimism is somewhat misplaced. we must ensure that proprietary solutions, like threads, are not the main way people interact with the fediverse. it's better to defederate early and continue in smaller communities while we still can, than to let them seep into every community we have, only for them to pull the plug later and lock everyone into threads.

i think it's alright to federate with them a little bit, but we cannot allow threads to become the most popular fediverse app

unfortunately lemmy already has those people, but luckily enough they seem to organize in tidy communities that are easy to defederate

yeah, was gonna say that's a user issue but it's in the biggest scabreddit so that's kind of on the admins too

just reminds me to Nolan Sorrento from ready player one

This is the first of our planned upgrades. Once we can roll back some of Halliday's ad restrictions, we estimate we can sell up to 80% of an individual's visual field before inducing seizures

idk which one is more sad, that reddit is actually doing this or that i had to specify "ready player one" when looking up the exact quote because otherwise it referred me to completely serious marketing articles

who the fuck designed this?