123·
1 month agoNooo not the alpacas🫣
“Coming soon to a species near you!”
Cosmic Cleric
All posts/comments by me are licensed by CC BY-NC-SA 4.0.
- 1 Post
- 2.38K Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 15th, 2023
You are not logged in. If you use a Fediverse account that is able to follow users, you can follow this user.
Didn’t know what that stood for, I had to look it up.
Constantly as wrong as possible about their own stupid links
Starting to feel willful, honestly
I don’t recognize that second quote, as it wasn’t stated by me. Could you elaborate?
102·1 month agoPersonally I suggest Fedora with KDE.
It has a great update cadence time frame, and good hardware support (indirectly backed by IBM). And games really well in Steam/Proton.
That’ll get you the most Windows like experience on Linux, for an average user who doesn’t like to tinker much and just wants it to work out of the box.
Just make sure to accept third party libraries / apps when you first install. It’s a single checkbox that you click.
Didn’t know what that stood for, I had to look it up.
I’m going to hope that’s wrong, and that it’s just a certain percentage in any professional caste that has bad apples.
I am willing to believe that the percentage of bad apples is larger in law enforcement, only because of the type of people who would gravitate to that type of position that would give them control over others, and how much money is spent on monitoring law enforcement personnel by the government for legal and ethics compliance, as well as mental suitability to do the job.
And no need to reply to me with every bad thing that’s ever been done by police officers. I read them all, here, as well as elsewhere. I just can’t subscribe to the 100% pop that ACAB stands for.
4·1 month agoIs it an external leak? Or an internal one?
My guess would be internal to the engine/compartment somewhere, with limited or no access to the broken part, or else they would have repaired it instead of just monitoring it.
My guess is that NASA has done the math and it says this is an extremely unlikely scenario to have happen, but they could do it if they absolutely needed to.
I guess I’m used to the old NASA, where they would never ‘play the Vegas odds’, risk the astronauts under any condition, besides the normal risks of just launching in a rocket in the first place.
Interesting to see how having a private business corporation involved would change that mindset.
I do hope you’re right, for the crews sake.
Its not great, but not nearly as bad as Challenger SRB O-rings.
I was speaking more from the managerial and not the engineering point of view, when I made that comment about the vibes. How management politics underplayed problems until a disaster happened
My point still stands though. If the leak grows large during the trip, and all the helium escapes, then they can’t maneuver the craft, which means they can’t get at the right angle to reenter the atmosphere without burning up.
And if the shuttle tiles situation tells us anything, they don’t take everything with them up into space, to do on-site emergency repairs.
Even if they brought extra helium with them, if the leak is widened (launch vibrations, etc.) to a point where the helium escapes too quickly now, before the whole reentry sequence completes, then they’re stuck.
Just feels like driving a car across the Mojave Desert, with a known tire leak, and hoping the leak doesn’t get any worse. Feels like a ‘roll of the dice’ moment.
From the article …
Stich explained that the plan is to monitor the leak in the lead-up to launch and, after reaching the International Space Station, reassess the leak rate.
I got major ‘O-ring’ vibes after reading that.
I can’t believe they’re going to fly with that leak.
11·1 month agoFor many many years even low end Android phones can perfectly run emulated game systems that came out a decade or two after atari, so cpu probably isn’t a bottleneck at all
Yeah, I kind of agree, but I just threw it out there as a possibility, as maybe their code base is really bad and non-performant.
From the article…
It did manage, however, to release a truly bizarre app for iOS and Android devices that requires two smartphones or tablets to work. One device displays the game and the other acts as a controller. It’s a weird idea and, according to Kotaku, “one janky piece of crap.”
The only reason I can think of them doing that is maybe because of CPU overutilization?
Either that, or they wanted to set one up as a game server, and then have multiple phones be the clients. They just forgot to add the feature to let the server run locally on the client.
because its stock continues to skyrocket behind the exciting news that AI will continue to be shoved into every aspect of all of its products until morale improves,
Okay, I have to admit, this made me laugh. Definitely commentary, but still, a good read.
Metaphorically, it seems like an animal chewing its own foot off, when trying to escape a trap.
Gives off vibes like its trying to protect the rest of itself, especially after so many years of being a monolithic company.
12·1 month agoCorrect me if I’m wrong, but wouldn’t the person who effectively “owns” the content you produce on Lemmy and has the right to license it be the person who runs the instance your account is signed up to?
No. The TOS does not claim ownership of the content being posted.
You should read the article yourself. There license has nothing to do with AI.
I have. The description of the usage of the license is accurate. I used to just put ‘Creative Commons License’ but others were asking me about the purpose of using the license. I saw someone else use that description (they also add licensing to their content/comments), and just used it for mine as well.
Creative Commons solves a particular problem for us – how to encourage republication at scale without tying up staff in negotiating deals and policing unauthorized uses. We’ve found it an invaluable aid in building our publishing platform, in reaching additional readers, and in maximizing the chance that the journalism we publish will have important impact.
You need to stop pointing at ProPublica as if you’re copying them, because you aren’t.
I am though. Its showing a justification that a post/comment can be licensed. I mean, by default all content is already licensed, I’m just licensing mine with a more restrictive license to prevent commercial usage.
The reason people are annoyed by you is because it amounts to spam.
Its not spam, it has a purpose. Its not advertising.
It could be client specific as well.
And yes, if a client can’t support subscript/superscript fonts, per Lemmy’s formatting instructions, then the user needs to contact the devs of their client, to fix that problem.
The irony being that originally I wasn’t using a sub/superscript font, but I was getting complaints about the regular sized font being used for the license declaration, so I tried making it smaller as a compromise.
I really like it. Except your spam is everywhere you are and takes up screen real estate. This is again where ProPublica differs. On the post you keep referring to, there is not a link to the license, just the lettering at the top of a lengthy article.
Well, give me another way of licensing my content and how that license is displayed and travels with the content as it’s federated, and I’ll use it.
Otherwise, you can’t format the Internet to look just like how you personally want to see it.
And I’d argue the constant derailing of OPs with this same argument that never comes to a resolution time and time again does not help with how many times you see my license being displayed in my comments.
I’m sorry, but I have the right to license my content. Its not my responsiblity to format my posts/comments to your approval. And if you feel listing a license for my posts/comments is spam, feel free to block me, because I’m not going to stop doing it.
ProPublica didn’t post that to Lemmy, they publish to their own site. Someone else (PirateJesus) copy-pasted their article and posted it here.
That article is licensed by ProPublica though, with that Creative Commons license. Its just being noted in the Lemmy post, per these instructions.
Per ProPublica, including a Creative Commons license in your post/comments is a valid thing to do, when sharing their articles. You can’t hand-wave that away, citing the license in which an article is being shared as part of the post/comment is a valid thing to do.
Nobody with a cringey sovereign citizen boomer-type signature on each of their comments gets to remark on anyone else’s peculiarities 😅
Doesn’t seem to be a ‘cringy sovereign citizen boomer-type signature’ for ProPublica: https://lemmy.world/comment/9850401
Edit: Here’s a great Ask Lemmy from a few weeks ago all about this https://lemmy.ml/post/15152684
If you are going to include that link, you should also include this one, which shows that ProPublica does the same thing: https://lemmy.world/comment/9850401
What on earth is that link at the bottom of your comment? Are you…licensing it?
Its done manually, a copy and paste of the following text …
[~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode.en)
How do you add some text automatically to the comments/posts? Or do you do it manually?
Its done manually, a copy and paste of the following text …
[~Anti~ ~Commercial-AI~ ~license~ ~(CC~ ~BY-NC-SA~ ~4.0)~](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/legalcode.en)
From the article…
That’s what it comes down to, right there.
Google needs to spend money on people, and not just rely on the AI automation, because it’s obviously getting things wrong, its not judging context correctly.
Anti Commercial-AI license (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)