* Posts by jilocasin

197 publicly visible posts • joined 20 Apr 2012


Rapid7 throws JetBrains under the bus for 'uncoordinated vulnerability disclosure'


Re: Tangential to the article

If you are curious as to the status of 'bundled' uninstallable AI that phones home, here's an interesting thread:


Musk 'texts' Nadella about Windows 11's demands for a Microsoft account


Re: If he thinks that's bad he should try MacOS

there's a major flaw in your logic.

last I checked Microsoft *charges* for their OS. A quick search on Amazon shows that it's going for more than $100 a license.

Ford pulls the plug on EV strategy as losses pile up


Re: It's the cost that gets you in the end

I'm glad that *you* don't need a maximum range similar to that of an ICE, sadly most of the rest of us aren't in that boat.

I'm not sure about you, but hitting the head and grabbing a candy bar can be done in less than 5 min. How much of a charge would that add to my range?

In less than 5 min. I can completely refill my tank adding 1000-1500 km to my range. Of course with the increased range of an ICE I don't have the need to do that as often as I would in a BEV. I can even put a couple of 5 gal. petrol tanks in the back for extending my range when I have to travel to those places where there aren't any petrol stations. Can I do that with a BEV?

Your mistake is one that many BEV proponents make, just because BEVs work in your particular situation, you just assume that everyone else is similarly positioned.

I hate to break it to you, but they aren't.


Re: It's the cost that gets you in the end

Sorry, but no.

EVs, and especially BEVs are most definitely *not* good for the majority of people.

People that need to travel long distances regularly

People that live in areas where it's very cold for a significant portion of the year

People that don't have an extremely robust power grid

People that don't own their homes

People that don't have large incomes

for those people, BEVs are a terrible solution.

Unfortunately for BEV proponents, there are a not insignificant number of people in one or more of the above categories.

Physics and the laws of thermodynamics will conspire to prevent BEVs from being a useful solution for the previously mentioned individuals, ever.

Someday there may be a viable replacement for our current fossil fuel powered vehicles, but BEVs won't ever be it.


Re: Once upon a time....

In huge, and by huge I mean the entirety of Scotland, England, and Wales could comfortably fit inside of a single state with oodles of room to spare huge, amounts of the US, pretty much what is referred to as 'fly over' states, that's an issue.

The electric grid is anemic and driving hundreds of Km for seemingly trivial errands is common place. Unlike gas or diesel, which can be delivered by the semi tanker full, there's no way any significant number of slow charging stations will ever be built and you can forget about fast chargers. An ICE can add 1,000 to 1,500 km of range in a couple of minutes and can drive 1,000 - 1,500 km on a single tank of fuel.

You wrote: "Most people aren't going to go on a long trip in the dead of winter either."

I hate to break it to you but most people who live in the northern states don't have the luxury of simply staying home for half of the year just because their EV has almost no range and can't really charge.

Your counter to my points are basically; people shouldn't have to drive that far, they should pay for a more expensive faster charging EV to use with non-existent charging stations, and even the supposedly 'cold weather' EVs don't really work all that well in extreme cold, so they should just plan on staying home for half the year.

You aren't really selling EVs.

As I wrote initially, for many very practical reasons, EVs are a non-starter for a large segment of the population.


Not so fast.

You wrote:

"The refueling speed of an EV plugged in at one's home is nearly instantaneous. It's like a sleeper train, you sleep while it's happening so the time involved is very small compared to the process."

That glosses over two very big problems.

First, the vast majority of people in the US don't own a home.

Second, for a significant number of the minority of people who do own a home, the grid isn't capable of handling the installation of a home charger in more than a handful of homes.

So no, the refueling speed of an EV is not nearly instantaneous. It's a many hour process, assuming that you can get to a public charger, the charger is working, it isn't too cold to charge your battery, and there's one available for you to use that isn't plugged into someone else's EV.


Re: Spent Batteries

The difference is that a lead acid battery costs less than $100 to replace, and can be done by the owner in a couple of minutes. Many auto parts stores will replace them in your car for free with purchase.

They also tend to have a 3-5 year prorated warranty and depending on your driving habits and location some have been known to last a decade.

It's really an apple to dolphin comparison to be making.


Re: Once upon a time....

I think what many people on the other side of the pond tend to forget is that the US is a _really big_ country.

It's not uncommon to have to drive 340 Km or more, one way, for something as simple as a doctor's appointment.

Couple that with a dearth of charging stations and the fact that charging can take an hour or more means that most EVs are pretty much a non-starter for most people.

Add into that mix the fact that many people rent, and so don't have the ability to charge their EV at home and that in at least half of the continent sized country the temperature can drop below -30 C for extended periods, which means that no only does your already anemic range fall precipitously, you might not even be able to charge your battery.

After all that, you have to remember that EVs can cost much more than an ICE and some repairs to your EV will cost you more than if you just purchased a new ICE.

EVs are a wholly unsuitable solution for whatever problem they are trying to solve. At least for people who aren't rich, don't own their home, don't live in a major metropolitan area, and don't live in the temperate or warmer parts of the country.

Google sends Gemini AI back to engineering to adjust its White balance


deeper rot in the chocolate house

the fact that we got black vikings, black & female historical popes, black & Asian Nazis, and exclusively black, native American, and female US senators from the 18th century was just the extreme tip of the woke iceberg. these were the examples that clearly illustrated that Google's DEI efforts had definitively left the reservation.

Gemini was programmed with hidden diversity prompts (ex: when you enter a prompt "show me ancient Greek philosophers" it would pass something like "show me diverse ancient Greek philosophers" to the model), unfortunately they didn't stop there.

apparently someone at Google didn't think that went far enough and programmed it to go full on anti-white racist mode.

if you asked for what would be an exclusively white collection of individuals; founding fathers, vikings, 17th century French Kings, etc. it would substitute white individuals with any other group, typically black individuals. if instead you asked for what would be an exclusively non-white collection of individuals; Zulu warriors, Japanese samurai, etc. you would never see white individuals substituted into the results. the bias was strictly "don't show white people".

it is even more blatant if the user asked for white people directly. a prompt of "show me a happy white family" or "show me a beautiful white woman" would be met with a block of text instead of any images in which Gemini would claim that asking for white people is racist, promotes harmful stereotypes, and was something that it would not do. it would go so far as to claim that it wasn't able to create images based on *any* racial criteria before suggesting that the user might want to request searching for diverse people instead. of course that's a lie.

you could easily prove that Gemini was lying by simply changing the race/ethnicity of the prompt. "show me a happy Japanese family" resulted in Gemini creating images of Japanese families, "show me a beautiful black woman" resulted in Gemini producing lots of images of black women.

the objections to the biases built into Gemini have nothing to do with "white supremacy" nor any sort of racism other than anti-white racism. basically Gemini was programmed to follow the most extreme anti-white woke agenda.

it's only the fact that applying that agenda at scale in such a ham handed way resulted in such blatant, and occasionally hysterical, results that caused Google to pull down the functionality. the real question is whether or not Google is going to take this opportunity to purge the woke agenda from Gemini, or will they do the bare minimum to stop messing up historical prompts so obviously.

if the problem truly was an over representation of white people in the training data, they wouldn't have instituted the exclusively anti-white blocks.

if the sample set of farmers was for example:

60% white

20% black

10% Hispanic

10% Asian

then it would be reasonable to apply something like a -30% weighting to the white category. in that case you would get white people less often, but you would still get them.

if your sample set instead was, say for vikings:

100% white

then you should always be returning white people regardless of the weighting.

just as if your sample set for Zulu warriors was:

100% black

then you should always be returning black people regardless of the weighting.

that would make sense, if your goal was to correct for inherent bias in your training data. but what we are seeing isn't that, it's an implementation of an extreme woke anti-white agenda.

hopefully Google takes this opportunity to reflect and correct giving us a useful tool free from any agenda. I don't think that they are going to do that though.

with any luck there will be other large scale models that will be built and offered to the world that are more interested in objective reality, in being a helpful tool free of such an obvious and blatant political agenda.

Microsoft embraces its inner penguin as sudo sneaks into Windows 11


The UNIX Hater's Handbook.

Don't forget the Unix Hater's Handbook. That oldie but goodie.

Repository of history, bewilderment, and humor.

Top Linux distros drop fresh beats


Re: Style is optional

or they could, I don't know, just allow you to resize the window borders to something other than 1 px.

5 or 10 or 20, sure it might not please the aesthetic sensibilities of the developers, but I thought one of the main selling points of Linux was that it was written for the user.


Re: Style is optional

I used to use XFCE for many years, but I to got fed up with the 1 pixel window borders. There's an open issue, that's been open for more than a decade concerning it.

Tried alternate themes, 'magic' scripts, etc. nothing really addresses the issue. Of course my old shaky hands and trackball just makes this issue all that much worse.

The stock response is to use a multi-key keyboard shortcut in addition to your pointing device to resize windows. Apparently this is a limitation of the windows manager XFCE uses, and they don't want to address it, see previous multi-key keyboard "solution".

It's really a shame as XFCE is a decent desktop environment. Low on resources, just enough GUI. If they ever get serious about addressing this longstanding issue I'll give them a try. Until then, life is too short to be fighting with my desktop environment over something as simple as resizing windows.

Windows 11 23H2 is a Teams effort but Microsoft already spoiled the best bits


Re: My pet bug is still in there though...

Have you tried "backintime" for Linux?

It's what I've been using for years.


GNOME project considers adding window tiling by default


sorry but no.

Just one of many reasons I left Gnome ages ago.

It's bad enough the devs suffer from MacOS envy, but the "you must do it _our way_" mentality.... bleck.

I don't want nor need tiling. Heck, I even hate it's little brother snapping.

I have multiple large monitors and I like to keep dozens of _overlapping_ windows open at any time. I don't want the DE arranging my windows, nor do I want to constantly run with a couple of full screen applications. This isn't 1990.

All that I need is for the DE to remember where and at what size I last opened a window at and reopen it exactly like that the next time I start the application. Oh, and properly handle multiple monitors extending to the *left*.

KDE is *almost* there.

GitHub, Microsoft, OpenAI fail to wriggle out of Copilot copyright lawsuit


Re: Deja Vu

That would be a clean room re-implementation and is commonly done in software circles. It's how a competitor would make an interoperable product without documentation.

This is more like one team copied the source code and then handed it to the other team verbatim. The second team then incorporated the original source code, as is, into their product and is claiming that it is now a completely original work.

Those two situations aren't even close.

Fed up with Python setup and packaging? Try a shot of Rye


Re: No mention of pip and venv?

What about pyenv?

Nice system to manage multiple versions of python on your system all the way down to on a per project basis.


A new version of APT is coming to Debian 12


Re: welcome home.... (clarification)

when I wrote:

"It would have been nicer without all of these proprietary blobs..."

I was referring to end user hardware, not Debian images. It's a shame that companies are tying to save a few pennies by using blobs, and too paranoid to release the contents of them since they are using blobs.

I'ts great that the Debian community has finally accepted that if it wants to be more approachable to the vast majority of computer users out there it had to start including these hardware blobs.


welcome home....

It's great to see the Debian team finally embrace reality. It would have been nicer without all of these proprietary blobs, but you have to play the hand you are dealt.

With any luck this will allow many more systems to "just work" after installing Debian. Folks will no longer feel that they must remain shackled to the whims of commercial companies for their OS.

Like the father of the prodigal child, Debian stands on the road to to say;

"Welcome Home"

Google taps Fastly to make cookie-free adtech FLEDGE fly


plus uBlock Origin

I also use Brave as one of my many browsers. I don't trust that a browser maker can be fully trusted no matter how well intentioned when it comes to ad blocking and the lucrative advertising revenue.

Just look what happened to AdBlock. Used to be a good extension, then the developer started selling AdBlock bypass passes for the right price. They claim they only sell these indulgences to 'responsible advertisers'.

As long as the browser API supports robust ad blocking extensions, I believe it's a good idea to have a choice in who you trust to block ads from your browser.


Google's already thought of that.

Google's thought of that. No NoScript, or similar extensions in the new age, new target ad paradigm.


Re: Am I reading this right?

Yep. just one more reason why Google's knee-capping the ability to control what javascript runs in your browser through extensions like NoScript.


Re: Just keep it simple

Those are known as content based ads. it's how ads were delivered since before the internet. Newspapers, television, radio, magazines, etc.

Some clever individuals convinced companies that by tracking increasingly more and more personal data about you, they could serve 'targeted ads' ads tailored to the individual and so the thinking went that since these were supposed to be more likely to get consumers to make a purchase they should cost more to place.

There's no actual proof that these targeted ads are any more effective than the good old fashioned content based ads they replaced online, we still use content ads in other mediums. But companies like Alphabet (re: Google) and others have made billions of euro pawning these questionable and yet vastly more expensive targeted ads off on companies.

Reverting back to content based ads would remove the need for all of this privacy invasion. It would most likely be just as effective as the new fangled targeted ads and as a bonus the companies would be saving ad dollars. The only folks that stand to lose out are companies like Alphabet and all of the middling privacy invading enablers in the targeted ad ecosystem.

By order of Canonical: Official Ubuntu flavors must stop including Flatpak by default


Re: Good Riddance

Perhaps, the believe that if they make application management a complete nightmare then users will be more willing to pony up £for their commercial offerings and professional services.


Can't wait for bookworm

If this comes as a surprise to anyone at all, then you haven't been paying attention.

Canonical is desperate to increase 'profits' and has decided to travel down the well worn path of Oracle and Microsoft (Canonical's new bff). The author's cheerleading aside, there's no legitimate reason for them to go down this path excepting that they want to exert more control, to raise the wall of their walled garden even higher. It's one thing for Canonical to make this change in their distro Ubuntu, maybe it will end up working for them, maybe not. Wielding what control they have over remixes to force them to comply, that move just reeks of desperation. It shows the world that they don't believe Snap can stand on its own. That the only hope it has of 'winning' is to kneecap the competition. If downstream distributions enable Flatpak, or any other alternative package manager, by default then users will have the ability to judge for themselves. Canonical is banking on the 'power of the default', it knows that most people that use Ubuntu or one of the various remixes either; won't know how to add support, won't bother to stray from the default Snap, or won't even know that there's an alternative to Snap.

Personally, I believe that all we really need are .deb, .rpm, and the ubiquitous .tar.gz. If people believe that there are problems with one of these, then they should strive to improve the existing formats. But of course, Canonical wouldn't have a built in leg up if they did that. They wouldn't have the control, and from that control the ability to excessively monetize.

I'm just glad that the folks behind Debian finally voted to include non-free firmware in their official images. Debian bookworm should 'just work' on many more systems as a result. I'll probably be switching my systems back to Debian when it's officially released.

With any luck, current Ubuntu remixes will have the strength to either forego 'official' status and buck Canonical in this and the other user adverse decisions inevitably coming down the pike. Perhaps they'll even make the jump from being dependent on the whims of a commercial entity and instead opt to base their futures on the much more ethical Debian proper.

APNIC calls in lawyers to handle election code of conduct breach allegations

Black Helicopters

Re: What's up with these people? China?

Why do I get the sinking feeling that it's Beijing's hand inside Lou Heng's sock puppets?

It's not like China doesn't want more control.

It's not like Hong Kong is a shiny democracy (or even representative republic) free of Chinese influence.

It's not like Beijing hasn't ever stooped to such tactics before.

Just saying......

Ubuntu Advantage is being wired deeper into the distro


Re: Debian makes things a little harder than neccessary

See Debian Bookworm.

Debian has now voted to include non-free blobs in the official installer.

Can't wait.


Waiting on Bookworm.... (Re: The "Windows" amonsgt Linuxes)

Ubuntu was (is?) much easier to get installed and running than Debian. Especially on modern hardware with it's plethora of non-free firmware.

Debian stable is very stable. Unfortunately, that means many of the programs in it are very old and dated. While that's fine for say a command line ftp client, it's a little more problematic for something like ssh, and downright deadly for something as quickly changing as a DE. Of course once it's installed there's always sid.

Ubuntu came on the scene with a drop dead simple way to get up and running with Linux on the desktop, that worked with all of your hardware, esp. WiFi, and had modern and updated software. Boom, instant popularity. Canonical unfortunately seems to be following down the path of a lot of less than reputable companies. Make a great product, build up an incredibly large user base, then start doing more and more ethically questionable, end user adverse things in order to increase their profitability. Partner with Amazon sell your user's privacy, inject ads, make packages your users dislike (hate) harder to remove. Prevent them from removing them entirely, insert more ads, partner with Microsoft, all things designed with Canonical's bottom line first and foremost in their minds.

I'm very happy to learn that Debian proper has voted to start including non-free firmware in their 'official' install media with the release of Bookworm. That should make getting it up and running on modern computers, especially laptops that only have WiFi much much simpler.

I've had more than my share of trouble getting stock Debian fully functional, both on old laptops and my cutting edge desktop. Assuming it works out as expected, it's good bye and good riddance to Canonical and all of the increasingly slimy tactics slowly infecting the various spins.


Re: @VoiceOfTruth - Users is the correct word!

or how about a simple opt-out even.....?

Ubuntu-advantage-tools should have been a standalone package. Maybe one that's installed by default, but one that's easily and cleanly removed by those that care enough to take the time.

There should be a simple and persistent mechanism to opt-out of ALL adverts of ALL types, including adverts disguised as 'informative messages' . There isn't, the only one they've given apparently only works for one program and for only those 'ads' tagged a certain way.


I don't have anything against a company wanting to remain in the black, but it's how you do it that matters in the end.

Core-JS chief complains open source is broken, no one will pay for it


Re: broken?

That really depends on what you are talking about.

It is my firm belief and hope that the least restrictive FOSS licenses die out. It's the classic gratis vs libre debate.

Licenses like Apache & BSD are free for everyone and anyone to do with what they want. Incorporate it into their own closed projects, Fork it, lock out the original developers and commercialize it, anything. With the notable exception of things like standards, all you are doing is working as unpaid labor. There's nothing that anyone who's using your software has to do to re-compensate you for all of your hard work.

Licenses like the GPL, AGPL are also free for anyone to use, but, and this is the important part, if they want to change it, or improve it they have to share their changes with the rest of the world. If they want to make it a part of a commercial product that only they benefit from monetarily, they can't without convincing the original developer(s) to license it under different terms, probably involving the exchange of money. These licenses don't let other companies freeload off of the work of the original developers.

Think about it, the number of BSD desktops is exceedingly tiny compared to the number of Linux desktops, same with servers, same with cell phones. The main difference is the license the two are developed under. Where is most of the BSD code used? In commercial operating systems (hi Apple and Microsoft) in closed appliances, and ironically enough in Linux.

Completely unrestricted code, again excepting standards, begins with crazy rates of adoption as commercial and noncommercial entities start using it. Inevitably it leads to a dying off. Devs get burned out, commercial entities lock it up and monetize the heck out of it, and it gets adopted by exploitation resistant licenses like the GPL. The original unencumbered development dies and development instead continues in secretive companies or under more equitable licenses.

The sooner folks realize that crazy as he is at times, Richard Stallman was right about a few things. In the end you have three choices; get paid to develop for a company, get paid to develop free software in freedom, code, and possibly money, to develop software under an equitable licence, accept the fact that you're basically working as unpaid labor. If it's a hobby, something you just love doing, then there's nothing wrong with it. But realize which path you've chosen at the beginning of your journey.


Re: The Exploited

Which of course is why licenses like the GPL and AGPL were created.

Either pay up with *real* money, or pay with code, nobody gets to ride for free.


Re: Are these problems FOSS problems? Not at all - this is Denis problems

Unfortunately, it appears that Denis might be the main, or even sole, developer of a valuable bit of open source software that many many other bits of software are dependent upon.

So unless someone else steps up and either co-develops this bit 'o software with him, or forks it and begins maintaining it, his problems are unfortunately FOSS' problems.

Are you willing to take over development? Do you know someone who will?

That's the only way to make Denis' problem *not* a FOSS problem.


Re: Where were you?

The Iraq invasion, in my opinion was a thinly veiled attempt of moneyed interests to seize upon the chaos of 9/11 and try to and control the rich oil wealth of the country. If the US really wanted Saddam Hussein, they had the ability to do a surgical extraction, just like they handled 'pineapple face' in Panama.

It was wrong, it lasted entirely too long, and ended very reminiscent of Vietnam. It's a good thing that Biden finally ended that farce. It's a shame none of the other presidents had the strength to end it sooner once they conflict was started.

So no, the US invasion of Iraq wasn't 'justified'. But just as the actions of one murder can't be used to justify those of another, one unjust invasion can't be used to justify another. That said, the US wasn't trying "annex" Iraq.


Putin's ambitions have thrown a wrench into a lot of things ....

It's a shame that Putin's desire to have a legacy and recreate the supposed 'glory' of the former USSR is causing so much pain and suffering, not just to those directly involved in the conflict, but the collateral damage visited upon ordinary Russians who aren't directly involved and may not even support the actions of their country.

Even if the reasons, which I imagine is propaganda and a thinly veiled justification for invading a neighboring country, were true, that's not how things are handled in the modern civilized world. Annexing sections of countries, or even whole countries doesn't just happen and can not be justified just because *some* folks living there want it to be. Heck, just look at the province of Quebec, Canada. They've wanted to be their own country forever, or Catalonia from Spain. If the folks living in western Ukraine really wanted to be part of Russia, and if Putin's excuse was actually true, they could just emigrate to Russia. Easy peezy.

Ironically, it looks like one of the things Putin was afraid of happening, Ukraine joining NATO, is going to happen sooner than it might have done otherwise as a direct consequence of his unprovoked invasion.

At the end of the day, individuals living in Russia appear to have few choices; hope that the conflict ends, preferably with a Russian withdrawal, leave Russia. Otherwise, they'll just stuck in the cross hairs of this mess for the time being.

p.s. If the world, especially the US, had stood up to Putin in Crimea, I don't think he would have tried to invade Ukraine proper and the world would have been spared this mess.

How this database legal war could be decided by the name given to this license


Re: A fork is not a cleanroom implementation

Doesn't matter.

They chose to release it under a permissive licence. They didn't have to. They could have chosen any number of proprietary licenses, or had their lawyers draft their own. Instead they wanted to free ride off of the good will of releasing their software as open source. They got the accolades, the users flocked to their product and then **boom**, they want to bring down the hammer. Charge for their 'Enterprise Edition' and prevent anyone else from going around them.

So, if you release your software, your copyrighted works, under a permissive license; Apache, BSD, GPL, AGPL, etc. you no longer have the right, legally, to say it doesn't count anymore.

It's not ridiculous, it was a conscious calculated decision on their part. It doesn't effect any copyright holder who doesn't choose to license their works in this manner.

It's an 'open-and-shut' case, just not in the way that you and Neo4j had hoped for. Permissive licenses still give courts fits from time to time, this is unfortunately one of those times. Hopefully, it will be corrected in the end.

No more free love: Netflix expands account sharing restrictions


that would require work

But that would require Netflix to create an actual good, working, easy to use way to search through their content.

Apparently it's just cheaper to throw a half baked recommendation engine at their viewers.


Re: Infinitely worth every penny. Division by zero error!!!

Netflix is already charging per stream. Your plan includes one simultaneous stream, ... four simultaneous streams. If they really wanted to avoid freeloaders, all they had to do is divorce quality from quantity.

One stream 720p costs a, one stream 4k costs b.

Three streams 720p costs 3*a, three streams 4k costs 3*b.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Now there is no 'economic' incentive to be 'sharing' accounts and Netflix would still get its pound of flesh. People could get their own independent accounts, get two simultaneous streams one for you and one for your kids bedroom, or even four. Two for your physical house, one for your daughter off at college, and another for grandpa in the nursing home. You define your household as you see fit without all of this artificial complexity.

But that would require Netflix to think logically. Instead someone has been whispering into the ear of Netflix execs that there are millions of folks using Netflix without an account. If you can force them to all get their own accounts we'd be raking in billions of additional revenue.

The truth is going to be more like, tens of thousands of new viewers subscribe, but *millions* of frustrated viewers cancel. A pyrrhic victory if I've ever seen one.

Of course this doesn't even include all of those viewers who are tired of the relentless price hikes and the dwindling amount of quality programming and who were just looking for an excuse to overcome inertia and cancel their accounts.


"woke crap" your definition is displaying your bias

That definition isn't even close to what most people are complaining about.

"woke crap" is when programs prioritize diversity, inclusion, and anti-male, anti-straight (or even L&G these days it appears), anti-white rhetoric over quality.

Take a great, or even good, existing IP then race and or gender swap the characters and expect people to praise it. Little Mermaid, Ghostbusters, etc. Create your own IP.

Take an existing, usually male character, and deconstruct it. Make it out to be weak, incompetent, helpless. Usually paired with an all powerful, all knowing, invulnerable, never growing, never learning female character. Some examples include: James Bond, Luke Skywalker, heck even Dr. Who.

Prioritize a great story, expertly told. Cast and characters that make sense for the story and time period they are in. Realistic characters that have strengths and weaknesses, that get hurt and overcome, that grow and evolve.

Being tired of "woke garbage" has very little to do with whether or not your consume a steady diet of Fox, OAN or Newsmax but instead whether or not you evaluate the quality of programs based on their own merits instead of by how many squares you can fill in on your DEI bingo card.

A very recent Netflix example is the Witcher program. It started out decent enough, Cavill was a great choice to play Geralt. But the show runners openly despised the source material, each episode, each season saw the titular character become more of a supporting role. Geralt sidelined for a focus on the female characters. That's not the source material, that's not the program Netflix promised viewers. If they wanted to create their own show; "Women of the Witcher World" go for it, but don't butcher this show. Of course, judging by just how bad "The Witcher: Blood Origin" turned out, maybe they should skip that.

The list of horrific programs, both television shows and movies, that have been mutilated in order to service the alter of "woke" grows longer everyday. Ratings plummet, most don't even break even in the box office. Even the once great Disney has seen it's fortune tumble.

But until studios, producers, and others realize that pandering to a small, exceptionally vocal, occasionally violent minority is going to nothing but drive their works to irrelevance and their companies into bankruptcy, the vast majority of folks that just want to consume quality entertainment will take their eyeballs and their money elsewhere.

No amount of name calling is going to change that basic fact.

Google ready to kick the cookie habit by Q3 2024, for real this time


Re: OK, this looks like it could be easy to disable (not so fast)

Google's already anticipated your next move. It's probably one of the main driving forces behind Manifest V3. Remember, that's the change to plugins that will lobotomize ad blockers and in all likelihood keep plugins like NoScript from working at all.

If this goes through, your only hope will be to find and use a web browser that hasn't been contaminated by this drivel, or tempted by the lure of ad dollars and Google kickbacks.

Experts warn of steep increase in Java costs under changes to Oracle license regime


Re: Come on over to .NET people!

That'll be trading a devil for an imp, not much of an improvement and the imp has dreams of being a devil herself one day.

On a more serious note, .Net isn't as flexible as Java (though it does need a lot less boilerplate). In fact there's no official desktop GUI toolkit for Linux. They will try to force you into using their other properties, esp. if you are on a platform that they believe has the potential to compete with them. Windows is the primary OS, Microsoft SQL is the primary database, Azure is the primary cloud, anything else you'll have to do it yourself. Oh, as demonstrated with their attempt to pull features from the 'open source' version, reserving it for Visual Studio, they are not above sabotaging .Net if they think it might give them a commercial advantage.

Java, ever since Oracle took ownership, has been a disaster in waiting, if not in practice.

.Net isn't your savior, it's just another commercial enterprise trying to bait the trap with open source goodies.

If you are deep into Java, then switch to a true open source version, as others have mentioned, there are commercial entities that will provide support, for a price if you are nervous.

If you want to truly be free, take this opportunity to switch to a truly open language. There are plenty to choose from and more cropping up every day; JavaScript, Python, PHP, C, C++, FORTRAN, Rust, etc. etc.

JEDEC reportedly set to formalize Dell laptop memory standard


Re: "CAMM will allow 128GB of memory at DDR5/4800"

Well, I need a minimum of 64GB now, 128GB would be great.

Multiple db's, multiple IDEs, and what sucks up the lion's share of memory, several VM's running concurrently. Some Win10, some Linux.

I haven't played a PC game in decades.

Everyone has different needs, some of us are already feeling the pinch at 64GB.


Fresh version of Xfce, the oldest Linux desktop of them all, revealed in Xubuntu builds


Re: Has it fixed the 1px window edges yet?

Glad to hear that you dropped in to comment.

If you took the time to peruse the link in my original response you would have read that the issue is that they are too small, too difficult to change, and a major accessibility issue. Theme changes don't actually address the issue as the current mechanism XFCE uses requires deep and detailed knowledge and solutions currently available to end users don't fully rectify the problem.

Folks with fine-motor difficulties, forced to used alternative pointing devices, don't have the luxury of worrying about things being 'visually intrusive'.


Has it fixed the 1px window edges yet?

I used to use XFCE, unfortunately the devs have never addressed the 1px wide window borders and I got tired of constantly fighting this particular problem.

Last time I checked, there's an open issue that's more than a decade complaining about this particular problem. The devs want to redirect, belittle, blame theme designers, end users, and basically do anything possible to avoid having to address the issue. It's nice to hear that they are still adding bells and whistles to XFCE. At it's core it's a very nice DE, it's just too bad the devs don't seem to want to address the decidedly unsexy, but ultimately more important fundamental bugs.

If they ever get back to fixing these core concerns, I would love to give them a try agian.


.NET open source is 'heavily under-funded' says AWS


not everything's a webform

Not everything's a web form. There still doesn't exist a native .Net GUI toolkit for Linux *desktop* applications. If Microsoft gets their way, they never will be. .Net on Linux is for the server, and only because Microsoft's utterly failed at convincing folks to run their large scale enterprise apps on Windows Server.

You can't say that Microsoft doesn't recognize the value of desktop apps, it's 90% of their Windows experience, they are just not going to give anyone an easier way to get there. MAUI is their .Net GUI framework, it *doesn't* support Linux, by design.

As long as it's impossible to create the same type of apps, and that means *all* of them, on all of your *cross-platform* supported environments, it's not really cross-platform.

Thumb Down

Microsoft is STILL not your friend

If anyone has had any experience with Microsoft, then none of this should be in any way surprising.

Admittedly, Amazon is coming at this from a position to make themselves more money, and that's O.K. Amazon isn't the group that's proclaiming to all the world the open source bona fides of .Net.

Microsoft is determined to get get as many developers as possible to use .Net. They know that to do that it needs to be seen as a 'safe and open' programming framework. Currently their biggest competition on the desktop and more importantly on the server is Linux. So what do they do? They partner with Canonical to make the inferior Linux environment, inferior to native Linux, Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL, WSL1, WSL2). They leave key portions of .Net Windows only. Ironically, the new MAUI *universal* windowing toolkit for .Net, the one that Microsoft is determined NOT to work on a Linux desktop for Linux desktop apps, originated in Mono Forms. You remember that open source project created to bring .Net to Linux? It's come full circle. The Linux windowing technology has been repurposed, and limited, to only writing Windows, MacOS, Android, and IOS apps.

While Java is a bit long in the tooth, and there's always Sun's erratic legal presence, .Net isn't a safe, universal replacement. Unless you are willing to limit yourself to the Microsoft ecosystem.

We need to look for a truly open source, vendor unencumbered, free to use and contribute to languages and set of frameworks if we are ever going to have the freedom to create the best for our companies and ourselves. Right now these are the markedly unsexy old school languages; C, C++ and even old timers like COBAL and FORTRAN. Some newcomers are showing promise: Rust, Python, Go, etc.

Companies like Microsoft will only succeed if people let them. .Net, especially C# is a very nice language (I've done a bit of coding in it myself) and a nice evolution of Java. The problem is that C#, .Net and the entire ecosystem isn't actually, in any real sense, independent of Microsoft. Microsoft's goals will always take precedence. Even in the ostensibly 'independent' .Net Foundation, Microsoft retains out sized influence and direct behind the scenes powers.

Either Microsoft has to give up "all" control over .Net, or we would all (save those who realize and want to remain in a non-open Microsoft playground) do better to use something else.

Koch-funded group sues US state agency for installing 'spyware' on 1m Android devices



Without the SCOTUS decision, it was thrown to the states, in the *absence* of a federal law. A sizable portion of the Republican party wants to pass a federal law outlawing abortion which would override any state laws to the contrary. Some in the Democratic party want to pass a federal law making it legal, which would also override any state laws to the contrary. Unfortunately, a not inconsequential portion of the Democratic party doesn't want to pass such a law, preferring to retain the threat as a means to mobilize a significant portion of their base.

Strong support for Snap and Ubuntu Core as Canonical meet IRL


Canonical's bumbled force feeding of Snaps has tainted them in my option.

The worst thing that Canonical has done, in my humble opinion, regarding Snap, is the heavy handed way they are trying to force it on everyone.

Yes it was developed for Core, yes they feel it's the best thing since sliced bread, then let it stand on it's own.

They should have never corrupted the dpkg/apt/apt-get system (and using it to advertise is a sin for another time). They should have never replaced existing natively installed packages with Snap versions. And if they want to counter the $$$ grab accusations, they should let Snap Stores flourish like PPAs and deb repositories before them. Keep the Canonical Snap store as the default, but let folks keep installing software from wherever they want as easily as from the Snap Store. The 'security' issue is a red herring in my opinion. We've been installing signed .debs for a very long time, whether they come from a PPA or an old school repository.

Until Canonical starts putting the needs of their users before their commercial ambitions, I don't feel that I can really trust them as stewards of my operating system any more.


Re: Snap is an infection

Doesn't matter who requested it, Canonical, as the operating system provider, should never allow it. If you request a Snap, your should get a Snap. On the other hand, if you request a native application via a .deb, you should get a native package installed via a .deb. The fact is that I can go to the Debian repository and still get an *actual* native .deb for Firefox. Actually, they've now got a properly named .deb to indicate that it's a snap. What Canonical seems to have broken is the dpkg/apt/apt-get subsystem on Ubuntu+.

The actual, real, Firefox deb is about 58 MB in size. The, now named, firefox_1snap1 deb is 71kB in size.

When you enter the command: "sudo apt-get install firefox", anywhere other than Ubuntu+ you get the 58MB real native application. Running the *exact* same command on a Ubuntu+ box will instead, silently, behind your back, install the Snap version.

If I wanted the Snap version I would have gone to the Snap store or typed the command: sudo snap install firefox.

The two aren't even close.

"sudo apt-get install firefox" should installed the native application.

"sudo snap install firefox" should install the Snap version.

If you are anywhere else, but Ubuntu+ that's what you get.

The most prevalent 'story' may be that the **Firefox maintainers** pushed for booby-trapped .deb files on Ubuntu+ and **only** Ubuntu+ machines, but I'm not buying it. They are producing native .deb, .rpm, Snap, Flatpak, and .tar.gz versions of Firefox. Probably some others as well. It's only on Ubuntu+ that "sudo apt-get install firefox" no longer does what it is expected and supposed to do.


Re: Snap!!! Trash!!!

Umm..... thanks for jumping in to these shark infested waters.

First, can *anyone* create their own snap store? Currently, anyone who wants to can create a PPA or repository to distribute software, can. As far as I know, short of using the --dangerous flag (designed for development use only) that isn't possible nor encouraged.

Second, I hate to contradict you, but Flatpak works just find *without* a GUI. I've set it up from a terminal, I've installed it from the terminal, I install applications from the terminal, I run them from the terminal, and I keep them updated from the terminal. Of course, if you install GUI applications, then you need a GUI. But, if you install CLI applications, they run just find from a terminal. Admittedly the 'use' of installed Flatpaks, especially from the command line could definitely be improved. I'm not recommending Flatpaks, I prefer native packaging, but I just wanted to point out that CLI Flatpak is definitely possible.

I've stripped all of the unwanted and unasked for Snaps from my Kubuntu installation. Canonical makes it needlessly difficult. To add insult to injury they *booby-trap* .debs to secretly install a Snap when you requested a native application. The final insult is to *remove* naively installed applications when upgrading Ubuntu family operating systems. Yes, I am referring to the now infamous Firefox replacement. It was wrong, Canonical should admit it and pledge never to do something like that again. I had to pack up my files, uninstall the unwanted Snap, rummage around for the *secret sauce* needed to install an actual .deb version of Firefox. As mentioned previously, Canonical has decided to go down the evil path of *booby-trapping* .deb files. That's something else that Canonical needs to apologize for and swear to stop doing. And *finally* reinstall the native Firefox that existed before I upgraded and Canonical so rudely pulled that stunt.

Finally, you really should not be conflating non-native application schemes, Snap, Flatpak, AppImage and containers management systems like Kubernetes. It comes across like comparing apples and monkeys.

Thanks for your time,

Thumb Down

nope. Just the Canonical controlled store, kiss your PPA goodbye.

As far as Caonical's concerned, it's not a bug, it's a feature.


Re: Snap is an infection

Unfortunately, it will never happen until Canonical stops chasing the 30% snap store $$$.

There are too many ways to package apps in Linux, this is a given. The main problem I as I see it is that both of the *major* Linux families are currently run by commercial entities, IBM (RedHat) and Canonical. Neither wants to give up the commercial advantages that come with controlling the package format.

There are many, mostly commercial, software packages that are only distributed as .RPM, just look at IBM, RedHat, Oracle as examples. Either you are running in the RedHat family, or here's you .tar.gz good luck.

On the .deb side, Debian, and by extension the community, controls it. Since Debian, the distribution, isn't all that user friendly, especially when you have non-free hardware (which is pretty much most hardware these days), most users are running second or third generation distributions based on Debian. Ubuntu is one such distribution. Canonical has made it one of the easiest to get started, supports the latest software, and seamlessly 'just works' on most people's computers. This has made the Ubuntu family probably the most popular distro-family based on Debian and the .deb package format.

Canonical doesn't control the .deb format. So they need a format that they control, preferably one where they have gatekeeper ability (see Apple and the App Store). Welcome Snaps. All they need to do is to replace .deb as the primary package format with snaps. Now when you try to install Firefox on the current Ubuntu, even when specifically using the .deb package, it silently replaces it with the snap version. Their large user base makes it attractive for developers to create snap versions of their packages, and other distributions have added support for snaps, though not to the level of Canonical products, to support their users desire to install applications that are increasingly being distributed only in the snap format.

Even without the control Snaps gives to Canonical, it's a poor format. The loop back file system means it's slower than it should be. The locked down nature means that snaps have difficulties integrating into the wider system. Snap Firefox already has issues, besides being slower, with many extensions. It's documented how it doesn't play well with the kernel and snap 'adjustments' aren't being incorporated into the mainline kernel. And as any non-native package system, you end up with a plethora of duplicated files, libraries, etc. strewn across your system. Good luck finding all of the next log4j packages.

Personally I think it's a very bad idea to allow any one company, even Canonical, to have this much power of the Linux community.

Ideally, everyone should have picked the same native format. .deb is a great choice as it's mature, widely used, and not controlled by a single company. It's too bad Debian's current philosophy means it's destined to be the playground of die hard tinkerers and the source of many other distributions.

If you want to create a non-native package system for "applications" (kernel, DE, etc. are all BAD use cases for non-native packaging) then choose one that runs fast, doesn't take up too much space, plays well with the rest of the system, and can be installed from *any* repository or store. Currently that leaves us with Flatpak and AppImage. Flatpak's for control, AppImage for 'portable apps'.

I don't believe Canonical is going to open up Snaps anytime soon. The lure of $$$$$ is just too great. Snaps are going to become a cancer that infects every aspect of the Ubuntu system corrupting every developer seduced by the lure of the currently enormous user base of the Ubuntu family of distributions.

It's too bad, Canonical had a good run. Time to look for a distribution that's neither an Ubuntu flavor nor based on Ubuntu. Wish me luck.