stupidthrottle | 5 years ago | on: Making Emacs Popular Again
stupidthrottle's comments
stupidthrottle | 5 years ago | on: Making Emacs Popular Again
And he believes the right thing for the core Emacs-developers to do is to spend their time trying get everyone in MELPA (a modern package repo, with a modern GUI, based on modern tools and workflows) to instead move their packages to ELPA, with all the change in tools, modernism’s and workflows that entails.
He seriously believes this is important because MELPA isn’t GNU, and that’s all he cares about. It’s not enough to be open-source and free. You must be GNU, or it doesn’t matter.
He may add things of value still, but I refuse to believe it’s not overshadowed by all the backwardisms he constantly tries to impose on the core developers actually doing the dirty work.
stupidthrottle | 5 years ago | on: Making Emacs Popular Again
Following the discussion on Emacs-devel it does seem quite the opposite: you often see people with progressive ideas moderating themselves to not get too out of line with RMS. People (unconsciously?) try beating around the bush, to avoid touching GNU dogma, rather than going straight to the point, communicating efficiently.
While I really appreciate what FSF and GNU has done for computing, I believe the limitations Emacs-developers are putting on themselves by religiously denying to integrate with anything non-GPL (another Stallmanism) is going to hurt Emacs long-term, rather than benefitting GPLed software.
I guess time will tell.
stupidthrottle | 5 years ago | on: Making Emacs Popular Again
While your first statement is true, taking the second one for granted is dangerous and may lead to the exact opposite.
Every long-term FOSS project needs to continuously ensure it maintains a healthy level of contributors, or it will die.
stupidthrottle | 6 years ago | on: Moznet IRC is dead; long live Mozilla Matrix
I thought you said it was web-based?
stupidthrottle | 6 years ago | on: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore
You were trying to use an outlier, an extremist situation (badly representing the opposing part) to frame a discussion about general principles for politics.
Of course you will get downvoted. It’s not a constructive contribution.
stupidthrottle | 6 years ago | on: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore
My personal view is that people should be free to be who they are, and as long as it doesn't negatively impact others, it should be their own bloody business, and should have no legal implications.
So you're gay? You're a queer? Good for you! And no legal implications, please.
So you're legally man, with XY chromesomes, and you somehow feel like a woman, and maybe even like to dress as one? Good for you! Have fun, be proud, defy conventions! I do not hate you, but you are still a man, so no legal implications please.
To me, that's a statement of facts, and there's nothing awfully political about it.
The people who oppose that simple rationalist approach, are the ones who are rallying for a political platform, while at the same time claiming that opposing viewpoints must absolutely be denied a voice.
Despite the popular notion that these people are "liberals", there's nothing liberal or moderate about such a view, quite the contrary.
stupidthrottle | 6 years ago | on: Google Doesn’t Want Staff Debating Politics at Work Anymore
Clearly that’s not the case, unless you make it your mission to make it so.
> How does one avoid politics when calling someone 'he' or 'she' (either way) is a political act?
If you allow this to be a treated as a political act which can only 1. be applied by someone who wants to exercise power over others, and 2. Can be used by former group to claim discrimination universally...
> what does one do when a workplace bans politics
Clearly politics is not banned, only certain kinds of politics is. The other kind is being enforced hard.
Don’t accept the double-speak.
stupidthrottle | 6 years ago | on: Technical Details on the Recent Firefox Add-On Outage
Sure. Which is why these are heavily secured and guarded. Just like the keys for any cert, and highly trusted root certs in particular.
Any private/public crypto system can be compromised if the private keys are leaked. Everyone knows that.
That however is in no way a good argument for not using timestamps.
stupidthrottle | 7 years ago | on: Mozilla is giving up on their IRC server
So private channel and closed platform.
Excellent discoverability and excellent UX, eh?
stupidthrottle | 7 years ago | on: Scribd taking down the Mueller Report is the future the EU has voted for
stupidthrottle | 7 years ago | on: Micro-promotions and mentorship: impact of small actions in engineering culture
Micro-aggressions are just made up offenses in the mind of the receiver.
stupidthrottle | 7 years ago | on: “Android is reaching EOL in the next 4-5 years”
Fuschia is the OS and kernel nobody asked for which is licensed so that Google and partners can make locked down, closed source phones.
stupidthrottle | 7 years ago | on: “Android is reaching EOL in the next 4-5 years”
Fuschia will let them release a fully closed down platform.
stupidthrottle | 7 years ago | on: AMP pages displaying your own domain
Don’t use Google search.
That’s all. That’s really all there is to it. You should give it a try!
stupidthrottle | 7 years ago | on: Julian Assange arrested in London
https://www.rawstory.com/2010/12/assange-rape-accuser-cia-ti...
stupidthrottle | 7 years ago | on: DNS-over-HTTPS Policy Requirements for Resolvers
The network operator provides an IP through the DHCP response, which also includes proper DNS-settings for that network.
How is this malicious or replacing “your” DNS? The DNS belongs to the network.
stupidthrottle | 7 years ago | on: DNS-over-HTTPS Policy Requirements for Resolvers
In which case these applications are either broken or malware.
The application needs to fix that by using DNS supplied by the OS, as everyone should do.
stupidthrottle | 7 years ago | on: 339 Bytes of Responsive CSS
There’s literally no distinction.
stupidthrottle | 7 years ago | on: DNS-over-HTTPS Policy Requirements for Resolvers
And why is that an unreasonable position for a network operator to hold?