Can you link to a source that confirms this information can be collected with JavaScript (with browser comparison, ideally)? That seems outrageous if it was actually possible.

What is meant by "sensitive information" here? Browsers can't just willy-nilly access your local files or something like that. The one thing I can think of is using JavaScript to collect information that can be used to identify you. (Is that "sensitive"? I'd put that in "identifying information".) My honest suggestion is to keep using NoScript and just allow as few domains as possible. The next best option is to stop using websites that break without JavaScript when there's no reason why they'd need it.

I can imagine there being a plugin that spoofs some common ways that allow sites to identify you cross-sessions / browser / websites without your consent, but blocking JavaScript (by default) is likely one of the best ways to reduce the amount of information collected about you. When you do find such a plugin, check out one of the "browser fingerprint" testing sites to see how unique your fingerprint is.

(That is, if I even understood the request properly in regards to the "sensitive information" bit.)

Wouldn't running on a CPU (while possible) make it less energy efficient, though?

Is this not what the "active" sorting does?

Indeed, it's a neat way to visualize gravity, but that's it. It lacks any sort of explanation of why masses appear to be pulled towards one another. (I will point to the other person in this thread saying it "explains gravity with gravity".) This is why I think the metaphor you mentioned detracts from the original video.

And you can use the with expression to create clones of the object with some properties modified.

From what I know, F-Droid compiles apps from source so you can be sure that the code you're running is actually made from the source code that it claims to be built from. On most other platforms, the developers could be uploading malicious programs that actually have the code changed from what's shared online as its source code. Then add the fact that other developers can and do look at the code, and what changes are made from version to version.

If you want your freedom – whatever that means to you – you go to an instance that represents those values. Admins that run their own instance get to decide how they moderate that instance. And that includes blocking (or defederating) whole instances, communities, or individual users. You don't have to sign up to one that does something you don't like.

Besides, you don't seem to understand the importance of moderation. If it wasn't for the ability to defederate, we'd have tons of fake instances with fake users creating fake posts. Not to mention people going out of their way to make others feel miserable. Do they have the right to spew their hatred? I have my opinion, but it doesn't matter. I happen to also have the right to join an instance that has a policy to take care of that stuff so I can browse for things that actually interest me.

If you go by what the loudest ones are saying about the headphone jack removal, then yes, it does give the appearance that it's a very unpopular change. However if you were to just ask random people on the street if they use(d) their headphone jack and what they think of this change, you'll probably find there's not a lot of vocal people out there that would not buy a phone just because it was missing it. That's why Fairphone did their market research, right? Of course it's still up for debate whether that was the right choice. And personally I would also prefer if the headphone jack was still default on phones.

Also see their official response on the audio jack removal.

TL;DR:

• Modularity and its influence on the phone’s size and weight
• Market and legislative trends (headphone jack is getting less popular)
• Longevity (less ports = less vulnerable to dust, water and general wear?)

• Just like there's Lemmy and Kbin that powers the "threadiverse" / reddit-like portion of the fediverse, Mastodon is only one software that enables micro-blogging like experiences. There's Pleroma, Misskey and many more. And of course there's always the possibility for more to be developed over time.
• Of Mastodon there's likely hundreds of so-called "forks" out there. Since it is open source, people can take that source code, and host their own version of the project. This means they can make their own changes, include changes by others, remove features they don't like, and so on.
• Mastodon is not just run by a handful of people owned by a corporation, forced to work for them. Large parts of the project are contributed by volunteers, which can jump ship to another implementation as soon as they feel like the one they've contributed to is not acting in the interest of users.
• Admins which actually host Mastodon instances get to decide when to update to a newer version, or whether they want to use a fork that includes the features they like (which the "official" Mastodon project has not (yet) included) or anti-features that might've been put there due to pressure from outside (possible but less likely).

The power here is in the hands of users and admins. We just have to be careful not to let a company like Google or Facebook/Meta take control over a substantial portion of the fediverse. See also: How to Kill a Decentralised Network (such as the Fediverse)

Not hating on people who like and enjoy PvP games, but to me it feels like it's a good way for a developer to make a game that doesn't actually have that much substance. Lacking content? Nothing to actually do in the game? NPCs are difficult to make interesting to fight? Just have players shoot each other. It's basically content that creates itself, not to mention (if you have good matchmaking) the difficulty ramps up naturally without you having to write better enemy AI.

I just want to fight stuff alongside other people, rather than potentially making another person's day just a little worse because I shot them before they shot me, you know? Is that too much to ask?