[-] mke@lemmy.world 186 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I think some people overestimate how many will migrate to Firefox in the near future over this.

  • High switching cost compared to finding another extension (e.g. uBO Lite), even if the resulting experience is worse.
  • Just as many Firefox users like Firefox, lots of Chrome users enjoy what they have too. They don't want to lose that.
  • The kind of tech-aware person who'd switch over this is much more likely to have seen the news months ago and taken action already.

As fun as it is to imagine an Adpocalypse shocking the masses and pushing them to try out alternatives to big tech, it's also way too optimistic, I feel.

39
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by mke@lemmy.world to c/games@sh.itjust.works

Starting soon at 18:00 UTC (a little over an hour from now).

[-] mke@lemmy.world 50 points 2 months ago

If a lawyer is scum, then so is the one paying them.

[-] mke@lemmy.world 68 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Supposedly, a lot of lying, staging, faking, possible fraud, generally shady and consciously exploitive behavior towards viewers, many of which are kids.

This is stuff I remember off the top of my head, according to 1 (one) half-watched video on the topic. In other words, I'm not exactly in the know.

[-] mke@lemmy.world 59 points 3 months ago

As in, swinging her legs back and forth over the ground, like pendulums, I believe.

[-] mke@lemmy.world 161 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

All the more reason to use Firefox with uBlock Origin if you can, which despite concerns regarding Mozilla are still much more likely to align with users' best interests and help you avoid being tracked all over the web.

Instead of deprecating third-party cookies, we would introduce a new experience in Chrome that lets people make an informed choice that applies across their web browsing, and they’d be able to adjust that choice at any time.

What does this even mean, Google?

[-] mke@lemmy.world 50 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Depends on what you mean by trust. This wasn't made any clearer by reading the article.

"We promise not to do bad things" is not a safe long term contract. If they can change the terms at any moment and retain control, then they can break that promise and that's final.

This is why open source matters. This is why we shouldn't let people try to change the meaning open source. True open source is forever open, it is the author's Ulysses pact.

FUTO keyboard is source available, and that's final, too. Whether it is also "source first" and if that term is worth recognizing at all is a separate and entirely valid discussion. Even the worst incarnation of source available is still generally better than closed source, in my mind.

Can there be a trusted space between open and closed source? Maybe, I don't see why not. Again, define trust, and who's judging. Some people already trust closed source proprietary software, for some reason, while others strongly reject anything that isn't free software—remember, we're not talking about price, here.

I wish FUTO and Rossman all the best, as I do with the free software ecosystem and most of open source. Open source is open source, though, let's not get it twisted.

[-] mke@lemmy.world 49 points 3 months ago

Don't waste you time, energy and emotional capacity trying to earnestly engage with people unwilling to do the same. You will gain nothing. They might gain something, beyond living rent-free in your head. It's a deal neither fair nor healthy.

Should probably apply that to every social media, not just Lemmy.

[-] mke@lemmy.world 34 points 3 months ago

This feels like something that should be solved by code, not culture. Users shouldn't be inconveniencing others when simply trying to share content with all relevant communities.

[-] mke@lemmy.world 97 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Semi-related, I'm still salty about Google's rejection of JPEG XL. I can't help but remember this when webp discussion crops up, since Google were the ones who created it.

Why care about JPEG XL?Because it seems very promising. source with details.

Rejection?Google started working on JPEG XL support for chrome, then dropped it despite significant industry support. Apple is also in, by the way.

Why do that?Don't know, many possible reasons. In fairness, even Mozilla hasn't decided to fully invest in it, and libjxl hasn't defined a stable public API yet.

That said, I don't believe that's the kind of issue that'd stop Google if they wanted to push something forward. They'd find a way, funding, helping development, something.

And unfortunately for all of us, Google Chrome sort of... Immensely influences what the web is and will be. They can't excuse themselves saying "they'll work on it, if it gains traction" when them supporting anything is fundamental to it gaining traction in the first place.

You'd have to believe Google is acting in good faith for the sake of the internet and its users. I don't think I need to explain why that's far from guaranteed and in many issues incredibly unlikely.

Useless mini-rantI really need a single page with all this information I can link every time image standards in the web are mentioned. There's stuff I'm leaving out because writing these comments takes some work, especially on a phone, and I'm kinda tired of doing it.

I still hold hope for JPEG XL and that Google will cave at some point.

[-] mke@lemmy.world 47 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

We need to get our politicians to do a lot more, a lot faster.

So we're still doomed, then? I'm sorry, I'm sure lots of this is meant to be incredibly uplifting, but it reads an awful lot like "green is cheaper, trust the market! Numbers go up, up, up!" when you consider that:

  • Climate change is impacting countless people in horrible ways
  • Climate change is still getting worse

The important thing to note here being that, even if a brighter future awaits beyond, the worst is yet to come. I'll get back to this in a moment.

Yes, that the science to save the human race exists is nice. Really nice. There was a period in which I genuinely wondered if there was any chance humans wouldn't extinct themselves. But that was years ago. I've since learned that "saving the human species" is a terrible, disgusting metric. The future of what I consider humanity remains grim.

Now, if the worst is yet to come, and we can't yet even accurately predict how much worse the worst really will be, take a moment to reflect on this: which part of humanity is better prepared to weather the incoming changes, and which part is more likely to be labeled "climate change refugees?"

Humanity isn't only the richest. It's not merely the wealthiest and most developed nations. Humanity is also a lot of people who will suffer, people who I'm unconvinced will receive the aid and support they need and deserve.

Because the root cause of these issues, the systems that govern our society, have led us here and are unlikely to go away anytime soon. Because these systems have shown incredible prowess at protecting select groups of people from certain issues, while failing at completely fixing them, despite not struggling due to a lack of resources and continuous technological advances. If the pattern holds...

Then humans will survive. Many will live well.

Humanity is still pretty screwed.

TL;DR:

"The tools are here, we'll be alright, just need political will!"

Who's we? And if getting politicians to do what's right was that simple, we wouldn't be in this mess.

P.S. I'm not advocating for doom here, I just wish more people understood that Americans buying cheap Chinese electric cars won't save the people living nearby the mine in Africa where the cobalt for those batteries was extracted.

369
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by mke@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world
[-] mke@lemmy.world 36 points 8 months ago

media file downloaded from a dubious source with an extension you've never seen before

VLC: "Let me play it."

It just works.

[-] mke@lemmy.world 34 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

What apps you install depends on your needs and preferences. It might help others if you include those in any future requests for suggestions.

I suggest not worrying too much about "removing your dependence on closed ecosystems" immediately. Just do as you did before, changing apps as you find better alternatives---only, this time, considering the advantages of FOSS. Simply by giving F-droid apps a chance before opening (I assume) the Play Store, you're already doing better than the vast majority of people.

Regarding discoverability and security, I believe participation in the community helps:

  • The Venn diagram of "FOSS app users" and "software enthusiasts" is closer to a circle. People like talking about useful, good software they like. Word of mouth recommendations is how I got into this stuff.
  • You'll be more likely to hear urgent actionable news (e.g. X app developer sold to bad company, here's the fork that will carry the torch onwards).

And so that this comment isn't completely useless... Mozilla are currently working on a mobile version of Thunderbird for Android, built on top of K9 mail. Been using the beta and liking it so far. If you want a FOSS e-mail app, keep an eye on that one.

P.S. I much prefer the dark side, and don't forget the cookies!

view more: next ›

mke

joined 9 months ago