Unlurker|Replay|About
Crypto foundation demanded employees endorse suicide pledge (denverpost.com)
•
> “If you reward making a stink with outcomes, then everyone will know that essentially making that kind of show both internally and externally is the way to cause outcomes inside of the EF,” he said, according to the lawsuit, which cited a recorded conversation between the pair. Well she was too effective at organizing a resistance. Can't have that.
•
> "Authors, maintainers, editors and distributors of “this software” would pledge to ensure the software remained free and publicly accessible, and would also vow to “take his or her own life with a sword upon failure to uphold any of the pledges in this license,” the illustration read. It was labeled “Source Seppuku License,” an apparent reference to a traditional Japanese ritual suicide. When the document went out on that Friday in March, employees were told to commit to the principles in the mandate by Monday or quit their jobs, according to the lawsuit brought by Kayleen Fulton, a Boulder woman who was fired from the Ethereum Foundation after she led employee resistance to the suicide pledge." .. wow. When your employer starts posting like Yukio Mishima of course you sue them. I have a new entry in "most unprofessional thing I've ever seen". And no, using the "should not be taken seriously" defense is also hugely unprofessional.
•
"Don't take it seriously" especially doesn't work when you start firing people who won't sign it.
•
"a 38-page document outlining leadership’s vision for the foundation for the next 1,000 years." This would by itself be enough to start packing all your office things into a cardboard box.
•
OK, but 900 years from now you’re gonna wish you had stayed at the ground floor.
•
I wish I had been surprised by what I read in this article.
•
Actual document: https://ethereum.org/foundation/mandate/
•
Wow, its weird to think that people can be so proud of their terrible ideas. To go so far as to post it on their own website. Project 2025 was published this same way. I though the "seppuku" line was hyperbole, but there it is in black and white.
Zebkit – Chromium as an embeddable library (github.com/ikey4u)
•
Nice. I'm a heavy CEF user on ZShot ( https://zshot-app.com , https://zshot-cli.com ), but strongly with you on this sort of thing should be easier to integrate. Also, very much with you in terms of exposing those libs ( like PDFium and FFmpeg ) to consumers, it lowers the shipping burden by quite a bit and just enables so much. A note to anyone going down this road, just as an aside: actually shipping w/ Chromium ( and especially w/ FFmpeg ) can get complicated. If you're shipping on Mac OS, you'll want to worry about notarizing all your helpers along with your main process ( I'm assuming Zebkit still running w/ helper processes ). Similar w/ FFmpeg if you're linking to the FFmpeg libs. And, w/ FFmpeg, just validating that your license compliance is in fact what you want to be shipping w/ - FFmpeg has GPL and LGPL modes, so making sure you have selected the right one is important. If I recall Blink is LGPL as well, so making sure you meet what's required there has some distribution effects that are important.
•
I don't understand. CEF exists; why load it as a shared lib/cffi? You just expose your app's process to all the issues that a browser can have, including security issues In most languages, CFFI crashes the whole app process since it's the same process. Maybe for personal stuff, it can be suitable, but nothing serious
•
I love that we're calling something that embeds pretty much the whole of Chromium "slim" and "light". Slightly smaller/faster than Electron is not the bar I would necessarily choose to measure software against.
•
Now please somebody make a Browser in the Terminal. Using libghossty and Kitty graphics.
How does this differ from CEF(Chromium Embedded Framework)? That's also a fairly pared down version of the Chrome engine, designed for embedding used by tons of projects, like games for their in game lobbies or OBS for their Web overlays. Personally, my problem with CEF is that it keeps Chrome fairly vanilla - and there's a lot of things in there that you wouldn't want to include in your user app. But there's a reason they did it like this - if they really took an axe to Chrome's codebase, they'd basically lose the ability to upstream new versions. Zebkit on the other hand sounds like it's gonna be more granular - we'll if they cope with this better, but I think there's definitely a market for a much more lightweight browser engine that's broadly compatible - for example, just getting rid of sandboxes and process isolation would be a huge but incompatbile change. So would be dropping large modules like WebRTC or video playback or webusb or whatever, that I'm sure 99% of apps don't end up using.
•
I agree with you on the core point: the same layer (zebkit embeds chromium using Content API), staying sync with upstream (it carries 60+ patches), the size reduce (using build options such as turning off features). For the size, I have some more to address: the real weight comes from Blink, V8, skia, network stack and media. WebRTC cannot be dropped since Blink depends on it. Video playback is need by most apps so it stays. And the webusb is small, drop it has little benefit. The main differences are mostly from shape, not the engine: 1. Exposed as a library with bindings (rust, python, JS without node) that can be run in your application's own event loop 2. Almost everything in the engine have a hook point such as permission, network, dialog, menus .. 3. Exported Chromium's C Library (such as boringssl, zstd, ffmpeg ..) for your app so you do not need compile it or ship it twice such as ELectron. 4. Exported feature rich PDF library (pdfium with improved) 5. Playwright inside, no cdp and no node are required
•
Yes it would be interesting to know what the pros and cons of this are compared to CEF. CEF is a massive PITA so it would be great to have an alternative, honestly
Children of Men: The Future Is a Mirror for the Present (reactormag.com)
•
I saw the movie soon after it came on Netflix. At that time, Netflix would mail the DVD. I found the movie soon after interesting back then but thought population collapse could never happen given the size of world population. Now I see so many countries in Europe where the population is decreasing and they need to shutdown schools because of low count of students. I remembered Children of Men and how prescient it was. I feel the same about the movie Her. We will be so lonely that it will no longer be shocking to have fall madly in love with an AI bot and mourn when the bot gets shutdown on the cloud somewhere.
•
One thing not mentioned in the write up, is that there is an animal in (almost) every scene of the film. Guess with no children attentions turned to pets. For me, helped to reflect that humanity continued to want to care, if not for themselves/immigrants/‘others’…
•
I loved that in the movie the high level ranking official, the cousin, works/lives at the Battersea Power Station, the same place in Pink Floyd’s Animals album cover :) makes a lot of sense when you listen to Pigs.
•
Also, now the building has been converted to expensive condos.
•
Haha, funny. Do all articles these days end with the appeal to engagement? I shall try it. A couple of things I like about the film are the fact that babies are wonderful and children are wonderful, even if that world realizes it only through their absence. I think the practice of this is going to be simply people substituting this experience with other things they consider luxuries, and then supporting a shifting tax burden so that the few productive and reproductive carry the weight of the machine. The shift from relying on one’s own children to take care of one in one’s old age to other people’s children doing so is that fewer people need allocate any of their effort into it. Free-riding off other people’s children is now fairly typical. Simply having paid someone else’s social security isn’t actually good enough. The agreement only worked when you did that and created the means in aggregate for your generation’s social security to be paid for by successors. But the old parasitise the young in the West (at least, not exclusively). “Tax exemptions for the rich” primarily takes the form of older people just being free of various forms of society’s needs. Already the median French pensioner has a higher income than the median French worker, with the latter eager to try to make his way into the formed class so that he too may transform from the stepped on to the stepper on. The other thing I like is that the movie is unambiguously hopeful. Kee and her child reach the rescue ship, hurray! Movie’s a bit bleak so nice to have a happy ending. But I really wonder about what happens afterward. Is it Kee’s responsibility as the only fertile woman to have as many children as she can? Mother of Modern Man she’ll be remembered as. Fun thought. So what do you think about what the movie implies and about the factors that bias society against the young?
One of the best movies I've ever watched, and one of the few that I could only watch once. It alternates between a gut-wrenching view of a very plausible future and scenes that have you sitting on the edge of your chair. To call it roller coaster would be an understatement. If you haven't watched it: don't read the rest of the comments here, go watch the movie, then read the comments.
•
It's the best movie of my life, I watch it about once a year (that's all I can bear to do), and I see the modern world reflected from it constantly. We're living in that universe right now.
•
Not quite, but it's getting there. You're braver than me. I didn't sleep for days.
•
There's just so many good scenes? And the long takes are truly art in every way. Also, the bit where the kid is just scrolling / playing on his device while his dad yells at him is some kind of crazy fever dream from right now.
•
Seconding, I caught it late one night on HBO when I was a bit too young to understand what was going on and follow the plot but the movie stayed with me for many years until some time ago where I rewatched it and came to really appreciate it.
There is also imho one of the best one-shot scenes ever made https://youtu.be/g2vX7IHg_SE Sits on the throne with the one in True Detective S01E04 https://youtu.be/vnRTITzYnXs
•
I only watched this movie once, maybe 15 years ago, and that scene has stuck with me. Rewatching it brought tears to my eyes again after all these years. That was some of the best, gut-wrenching movies ever made.
•
The car chase scene mentioned above https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOyAXPn1V9k
> "Babies are born anywhere, regardless of wars, terrors, and boycotts." One thing people never get about fertility crisis: people always have more babies in crisis and uncertainty. Simply matter of reproductive strategy: when you're not sure about the future, push for quantity, as fast as possible. When you have stability, you can accumulate resources, and not be afraid to invest them into fewer offspring. I don't think that people realize that they're doing this choice, but there must have been enormous evolutionary pressure for this to evolve, and a lot of data shows exactly that.
•
I don't think this is true. Steady employment causes people to get more kids. Just take a look at Korea, its new administrative capital with most public workers has the highest fertility rate.
Babies have always been expensive. The expense just happened to not be fully accounted for until recently. Although, perhaps it could be better framed as the short term expense was not accounted for, whereas now, the long term expense is not accounted for. Short term being less than a few decades and long term being more than a few decades. There is also a collective vs individual expense aspect.
•
This depends heavily on what time frame you're talking about. For much of history people would often have children to work on farms and support the parents when they're older. Sometimes this support system was nuclear. Sometimes it was broader in society. So how do you account for "expensive" here? I honestly don't know. But a lot of people focus on more modern times, particularly post-WW2, because the trend here is pretty much straight up. Education, housing and medical expenses have far exceeded inflation and real wages. In more developed Asian countries (eg South Korea, Japan, China) the number of children has gone down in part because it is so expensive. In South Korea, so much is spent on tutoring to get into a good university to get a good job. The entire family's income is devoted to that. In China, for a man to be marriageable he often needs to pay the bride's family, have property, have a good job and so on. China has actually tried tackling some of this by popping the real estate bubble and outlawing private tutoring. Still, competition is intense and the bride price is still very real. I think about the Fermi Paradox. What if the answer to why there are no galactic civilizations is as simple as "because capitalism"? Birth rates in developed countries are generally falling off a cliff as the barrier-to-entry gets increasingly higher.
> Babies have always been expensive. They have always been expensive, and they have never been as expensive as today. More than any other resource, babies require time. Talking purely from a US perspective, inflation adjusted income has never been higher. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/mehoinusa672n When we earn more, the time spent to care for a baby 'costs' more because it's time not spent working. It's time not spent continuing your education. It's time not spent doing some expensive bougie luxury like paying someone else to cook you a meal. It's a similar reasoning as to why working hours have only dropped a bit. When we earn more per hour, we can afford the same quality of life with fewer hours worked. However it also means each hour we choose not work is costing us more in opportunity cost. So we choose to work more. Still, considering how many years we spend in education with little to no employment, and how many years we are currently able to live after we have retired, the % of our lifetime spent working has never been lower.
•
They only require lots of time if you want to be a good parent. We should be celebrating the fact that there are fewer latchkey kids and more involved mothers and especially fathers today.
> Is Ireland considered affluent now? Ireland is the richest country in Europe by GDP-per-capita[1] (apart a few uber-rich city states). [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_Europe_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita > India... India has been struggling to get its population growth control under control for decades. I think we can excuse a brief overcorrection as they stabilise.
•
Ireland's figures are wildly unbalanced compared to other EU countries because so many companies decided to formally register their headquarters there. They don't pay as much tax as they should so the income stats are way up there but the positive effects are not as you might expect from that (if they weren't actually negative). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Sandwich This is now mostly a thing of the past but there are still lingering after-effects.
Mandela effect. The ship was always there, there are no alternate ending versions https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/iea5it/children_of_men_alternate_ending/
•
That's amazing. I think the ending without the ship is just better. So that's why brains of many people, including mine, made it to be that. I reject your reality and substitute my own. "There was an interview with the cinematographer who had argued for a more open ending with the two of them in the boat and you don't see or hear the rescue ship. So that was under consideration for a while. Maybe you read the director or someone taking about it?" It's entirely possible that I didn't even come up with the better ending to remember on my own.
Humans will never again create a project like Wikipedia (economist.com)
•
Gift link: https://www.economist.com/culture/2026/10/29/humans-will-never-again-create-a-project-quite-like-wikipedia?giftId=Y2UwMjQwMDgtMGMzOS00YzI3LWIyNGUtN2E3Y2M5MzhlNmM5&utm_campaign=gifted_article
•
Sounds like some MAGA bros I am friends with who were telling me in 2024 that Democrats would "never" take power again. Making "never" predictions is a dangerous game, especially when you are talking about human beings doing something they already did in the past.
•
"project like Wikipedia" is so vague I'm sure it is already being written
•
Wikipedia was banned in schools, just as AI is now. This affects how the generation is trained to view it. The main drivers of real world knowledge have been both been stigmatized in schools. AI is more appealing to kids because it skips the step of having to translate the knowledge.
•
Is Wikipedia about sharing knowledge, or do I miss something
•
the phrase 'Humans will never again...' is just enough to signal one not to continue reading anything in this article.
I'm pretty negative on Wikipedia so my reflex was, "good." Wikipedia taught me that history is written by the victors, and today, the victors are the owners of social and news media, and the editors and moderators of Wikipedia. I used to be heavily involved in a page I won't mention, and it was well cited and factually correct. For political reasons, moderators with higher standing than me gradually removed sections, edited them unfairly, and generally vandalised the page. All sanctioned by the Wikipedia process. I learned that my page was FAR from the only page where useful, factual information was removed and edited in dishonest ways for ideological reasons. I have no doubt it's happening all over the site for many reasons. Most people don't see the politics which goes on behind the scenes, and they don't understand how much this undermines the trust in the information. My trust in the site could not be any lower than it is. I trust the parametric knowledge inside LLMs more now. Honestly, I think knowledge like this is going to organically synchronise with consensus nodes in the very near future. Think of Community Notes on X as a prototype. That doesn't mean everything will be 100% accurate at all times, but I have zero doubt that it will be infinitely better than Wikipedia.
•
You won't mention the page, but could you give us a hint about what was the topic and the edit war about?
Shameless plug: last month while travelling, I kept walking around a new city and realizing later that I’d passed places with great stories without knowing. Many Wikipedia articles have coordinates, so I thought they could become cards you collect by physically walking there. Each card credits and links back to the article. I’m not sure it helps with the “AI absorbs it, nobody visits” problem, but every card links to the page, and I think players will go read them to understand what they've just collected. I also suspect a lot of collectors like correcting things. I know “I was there” isn’t a citable source (see the OSM post box story above), but photos are a real contribution: many Wikipedia photos are poor or outdated, and I’d like players to be able to submit theirs to Commons in the future. Built with MapLibre + Protomaps. I just added a waiting list if you're interested trying it out! https://wikimile.com
•
I've been on-and-off working on an AI tourguide which pulls Wikipedia articles near your GPS location, builds a route, and at each stop tells you some information extracted from the article. Nothing public to show, but I have learned a lot about my local area by testing it out. Yours looks much more polished, I'll look forward to trying it out!
I'm confused. It seems pretty clear to me that search-equipped LLMs have vastly improved the availability of high-quality knowledge to the average person, who no longer needs to go to Wikipedia and find a page and then look at the sources on that page (which is the most reliable part of WP) - especially because nobody reads the sources to begin with. Isn't that availability of information the entire point of Wikipedia? Heck, wasn't that the point of Google before they turned evil?
•
my fellow hacker news commentor, there are PR firms and people that specially create and craft wikipedia pages. Have you ever thought what is the barrier to have wikipedia page for company or people? It's bot too high and barrier and decisions are made by people, PR firms and people are paid for it. Not every page is about super famous or inventors etc. This is why it can never be unbiased, every human and org have bias.
I recently did a talk in opposition of this sentiment Yes, some projects like stack overflow may be losing contributors by a large degree, but it doesn't have to be this way I run SponsorBlock and DeArrow which are two human powered crowdsourced browser extensions that are only growing in scale in opposition to the want to slopify everything We have 17% of submitters every week being first time contributors and 19% being old, a nice balance. Unfortunately the talk isn't available yet but you can see the slides here https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1nGArM7c3i9cVGGvkh6ER3vSWVx0JGq_xRfuMdxllRzo/edit
•
What I like about SponsorBlock is the statistics it presents. Every sponsor segment I've contributed has saved 682 people from seeing it. Per each submission I've contributed by spending maybe 1.5 minutes, I've saved 63K person-minutes (44 person-days). Wow. What an impact.
•
This is the most optimistic way to look at it. People who couldn't code before but had ideas can code now, can build things, can contribute to projects they had no business understanding before LLMs.
I can't find a way to read the article, anyone have a gift link? (Edit: archive.today and wallhop.io don't work)
•
Gift link: https://www.economist.com/culture/2026/10/29/humans-will-never-again-create-a-project-quite-like-wikipedia?giftId=Y2UwMjQwMDgtMGMzOS00YzI3LWIyNGUtN2E3Y2M5MzhlNmM5&utm_campaign=gifted_article
> And there is no need to, because we already have Wikipedia. I became a Wikipedia editor not long after the 2nd version of the site, before they even had logins, IIRC. I was banned from the site probably 7 years ago or so by a troll who collaborated with the admins. The review "process" was more like The Trial and the ban was quite terrible, because not only did they install some deep cookie in the browser, but they permabanned the IP address. Wikipedia is gone. Whatever it even was, it is not now.
•
> because not only did they install some deep cookie We dont use "deep" cookies, just normal cookies. If memory serves, 7 years ago Wikipedia didn't use cookies at all in the block process, it was purely ip based back at that point.
The wikipedia images are incredibly easy to follow for me and I like that it is easy to copy and paste the info or download a copy, search it, annotate it/modify it, etc. Just recently, there was a thread here about different ways to ties your shoes laid out similarly with images. Many people talked about easily trying them out. Even if you are the type of learner who requires a video to learn, online video platforms, like youtube and tiktok, with ads & overlays when you pause them (and it might be hard to pause while your hands are full of silk...), with no out of the box way to download the videos, autoplay to who knows what next video, etc., are terrible vehicles for that. You can't search or annotate them. The quality varies as you stream it. Youtube and tiktok will not be better than wikipedia because the primary goal, the raison d'etre , of these products is to make money, track your behavior, sell your data to the highest bidder and show you ads based on it. I'm not naive to the fact that Wikipedia does this, but it's obvious that wikipedia is primarily a collective effort and not a corporate product, and I have more faith in a collective group of people than a tech CEO. Lastly, a video is a video. It is not another person. A person you can ask questions to, they can offer real time advice. Teaching someone how to tie a tie, your child, grandchild, nephew, etc., learning how to be an adult from a role model, is famously a rite of passage. If you think a video from a company trying to sell you clothes, hosted on Alphabet's servers, is a substitute for another person, especially in this age of AI generated content, I suggest you take a step back and reflect on what human connection really means.
•
> Lastly, a video is a video. It is not another person Was this earnestly your takeaway? I'm not sure you'll find anyone interested in arguing that a video is equivalent to a person. When I fix snowmobile engines I'd obviously prefer the company of a free and patient instructor showing me on his own machine right in front of me. This is not something that is available, so I settle for videos. > If you think a video from a company trying to sell you clothes, hosted on Alphabet's servers, is a substitute for another person, especially in this age of AI generated content, I suggest you take a step back and reflect on what human connection really means Yeah, nobody believes that. A human is a human and a video is a video. This was a really bizarre strawman, dude, you didn't need to write so much about a position nobody's remotely trying to argue. I would suggest you "take a step back" and reflect on whether you're trying to engage with what was written, or just trying to insert your derision towards a guy who doesn't exist.
This is most definitely wrong. People volunteer and crowdsource all the time, driven by ideals. And the async nature of the web will only make such projects stronger. There's OpenStreetMap, TV Tropes, fandom wikis, movie dbs, and a thousand others with no sign of stopping. But the future will raise the bar. Perhaps we'll see wiki of wikis, or something else getting the web closer to truly semantic knowledge.
•
> and a thousand others with no sign of stopping. StackOverflow used to be one of the big ones in that area and that is as good as dead. I see the same coming to TVTropes, fandom wikis, movie dbs and Co. once AI gets a good at interpreting video and getting access to some sizable movie libraries. When it comes to /r/tipofmytongue/ style questions AI is already much better than large groups of humans together, though only if the necessary information is available on the public Web. Lack of access to content outside the Web is really what is hampering progress so far, but that could go away very quickly whenever any of the big players decides to let AI run wild on whatever libraries they have. As for humans, I just don't see how they could compete. Wikipedia took decades to write, millions of volunteers and Grokipedia (despite being a bit of an unmaintained mess) caught up to its article count in a few months. On top of that comes that all those projects aim for a neutral POV, which is very non-human to begin with and only going to benefit AI.
•
Wikitree is also fascinating, to me at least! :)
•
There are two critical points for a wikipedia level project: 1. the culture of sharing your work 2. the sense of usefulness and purpose I'm not sure the newest generation share the 1, but in any case LLM companies destroy the 2. Why would you thanklessly work for free and for the community if your work is pillaged and sold for a lot of money by AI companies before the project even reaches a critical mass ?!
> movie dbs, and a thousand others with no sign of stopping. They do show signs of stopping.
•
Exactly. Erosion of the Internet's commons by spam, abuse, botting etc. were always a problem they had to contend with, but it's gotten way worse recently, to the point where several are either failing to cope or already dead (like StackOverflow).
Many longtime OSM mappers have sensed that there has been some decline in interest and a risk to the long-term future of the project as a truly amateur-enthusiast phenomenon. Causes include: younger generations raised on corporate platforms and their phone apps are less aware of non-corporate alternatives, and might even be suspicious of libre and altruistic movements (this is a concern in Free Software circles, too); as the map got filled in, there were fewer obvious blanks that struck a total newbie as a place he/she could contribute; corporations got onboard both as OSM users and stakeholders, and then some idealistic anti-capitalistic people have asked why they should contribute if the map can benefit corps, too, etc.
•
The kids are alright ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Zeloof ). They are putting up more of a fight than you can imagine. The root cause of centralization is the way we do hardware manufacturing (as explained here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49690354 ). I think it will take about 5 years to make fabs into home appliances, then the entire stack will decentralize from the bottom up. The future is most likely solar/cypherpunk, at least in America.
OSM is still too difficult to contribute to for mass engagement. I spent an entire day trying to figure out how I could contribute fixes to the map for my corner of the country. There are 30 roads nearby with inaccuracies that would take me weeks to correct by hand. That could be fixed easily if there was a convenient app that recorded my driving and uploaded it to a central source, processed it, and converted that into edits for me to confirm. Such a system might exist, but I wasn't able to figure out where it was or how to use it. If they want more users to contribute the system needs to be easier. Same for Wikis.
•
Record your driving using any app that can export a GPX file (e.g. Strava, RideWithGPS, or Komoot). Import that GPX file into the standard OSM web editor and trace the displayed tracks.
> corporations got onboard both as OSM users and stakeholders, and then some idealistic anti-capitalistic people have asked why they should contribute if the map can benefit corps, Anecdotally, I’ve had a lot of experiences like this with newer generations of people on topics like open source software or community projects: They’ve been trained, usually by a social media niche, to believe that the only good fight is to actively harm corporations. Their idea of the world is a very clear black and white contrast with people on one side and corporations on the other. Such a clean separation of the world only exists in ideas they get from social media and movies. Encountering a project like OSM or an open source project where the largest users (and for OSS, maybe the largest contributors) are people involved with corporations doesn’t fit into their worldview, so they file it in the “corporate” side of the divide and dislike it.
•
Much of the open source movement has its roots in anti-corporate culture too. Given that open source is now largely funded by corporations is a win for the ideals of open source but also a corruption of the early ethos; It’s very easy to equate open source with corporatism.
•
> They’ve been trained, usually by a social media niche, to believe that the only good fight is to actively harm corporations. Or maybe they just feel that corporations are actively trying to harm them and this is the logical response? I don't think that's unfair at this point.
•
This is another theme I notice in this same cohort: It is not permissible to even suggest that they’re doing anything wrong. Any time someone highlights behaviors or beliefs that have problems or are inconsistent, someone will pop up and blame that on the corporations, too. So even when these people have turned into a broken clock about being anti-corporate to the point that they’re anti-open-projects, someone will always come along to explain why we everything is the fault of corporations. A normal working class person can not be faulted for their beliefs in this model, because every fault will be transformed into something that can be blamed on a corporation. Personally I find the erasure of individual thought in this model to be demeaning. You can’t blame everything every individual does on corporations having either made them do it or forced them to believe it through their actions. At some point we have to admit that people’s thoughts and actions are their own. If someone becomes so bitter that they’re becoming anti-OSM or anti-Wikipedia or anti-OSS, I’m fully okay with holding them to account for their chosen beliefs.
•
Yeah, that seems like a perfectly natural response to the corporate capitalist hellscape the rising generations find themselves in. Shock horror, people tend to care most about things that they feel personally affect them.
•
If you think about government and corporations - they're responsible for so many bad things in the world! I guess that's true, but how much of it is them just doing all the stuff? So I don't know that it's fair? Nearly all the material goods around me and a ton of services were provided by corporations, which are largely composed of regular people glued together at scale by bureacracy.
•
Everything is actively getting worse for more corporate espionage. I didn't actually say anything about government, mine seems to genuinely care for our welfare. Corporate food products (at least from the US) seem to be designed to just get you to consume more of them.
•
The material goods around me are crap and only serve to bring me further from being in touch with what it means to be human
> ideas they get from social media and movies. This is something I've noticed as well. - Movies made after WWII that needed villians often made them Nazis. - During the cold war, evil villians were communists or Soviet spies. - Movies made after the fall of the Soviet Union often make their villians evil faceless corporations. A generation or two has been raised by Hollywood and Disney on business always being evil, while simultaneoulsy choosing to consume and make themselves dependent on giant corporate content.
•
> A generation or two has been raised by Hollywood and Disney on business always being evil, while simultaneoulsy choosing to consume and make themselves dependent on giant corporate content. It’s fascinatingly devilish, isn’t it? They control the outrage and profit from it. I’m reminded of Bill Hicks’ bit on marketing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHEOGrkhDp0
> now you either consolidate power into your hands (nazi mods), lose motivation (project decays), or become an "evil" capitalist(start charging money for access). You never hear about them but there are also invitation only communities where contributing is required. The benefits are not shared outside.
•
There's also a teapot in space. Prove that there isn't.
For long years it was dominated by one mapper who considered the country his personal project and insisted on an idiosyncratic tagging scheme. He became infamous for instantly reverting edits even by savvy mappers. Intervention by OSM's conflict-resolution body has reduced that somewhat, but that country remains a special case.
•
The utterly insane way the Danish community forbids linking addresses to POIs (shops, restaurants, you name it) comes to mind. They've built a system where they import all addresses, but they never managed to make it work in combination with user contributed data, so every address gets deleted unless imported by their official import tool. So a restaurant can never get associated with its address in Denmark on OpenStreetMap. Meanwhile, the Dutch community also imports all official addresses, but there the tool simply allows for these to be used with other OpenStreetMap tags. It makes you wonder about the Danish approach.
Many longtime OSM mappers like myself are acutely aware of various corporations making big bucks on the back of our volunteered time and effort. Often times without contributing anything. Recently made worse by horrible API abuses. I get why people might not be motivated to join us in the tragedy of the commons.
•
Why doesn't OSM have a separate price for corporate users of their data? ie: a company with above a certain number of employees pays more
This is not a new problem. I worked in corporate IT in the early 2000’s. Both attitudes existed even then, though of course there was no App Store back then. Nevertheless there was a strong preference among younger employees for paid software—the kind you get in boxes. The older generation viewed most software as suspect, but were willing to accept “official” solutions from Microsoft and other name brand software vendors. It seems comical now, but at the time Red Hat was viewed almost universally among my coworkers as a terrible idea. And forget about custom software. Rolling one’s own software was widely seen as crazy talk.
•
Already in the 90‘s I has advocating for FOSS in a big company. And someone told me “nobody was ever fired for buying IBM” that phrase was already very old…
It took me the best part of 20 years of working in the corporate world to realise that the decisions aren't about the best thing for the user, or the employee, or even the shareholder, it's about the best thing for the decision maker. Ideally one which allows them to have no accountability whatsoever. It's the whole reason management consultancies exist. If Deloite tell you to do X, or Gartner say buy Y, and you do, you aren't going to have the blame. Even when you end up losing half a billion as our last CxO did, you'll just get a golden handshake and a move to another company.
•
Someone who worked in corporate law once said "in the rare case you have to hire outside counsel you always hire the fanciest name brand firm. Not because the fancy firm does better work, but because of risk mitigation and CYA. If things go sideways then you can say 'not my fault,I hired the fanciest firm.'"
Why should the GPL be the default? If you don't want your software used commercially, don't Open Source (or Free Software) it. Maybe a CC-NC license if you want to give it away for noncommercial use. The rest of us will continue to use and make OSS and enjoy it without worrying about what others are doing with it.
•
Default for people who want their open source work to stay open source and not privatized by billionaire companies.
You've discovered some sentient non humans have you?
•
You don't have to be sentient to post on the internet.
Browsing the small web is not that simple right now. Even if tools such as Marginalia help, it's still quite difficult for discoverability.
•
help us, Google!
Also here, that’s still an option, and comments are still there and (I guess) open to new entries. So what is the concern pointed at here?
•
Just that there wasn't anything else like it at the time. There still kind of isn’t. The reduced context switching of curated questions and answers on the official documentation site is great.
Humans will never again create a project like _______.
•
The exact cadence one expects from a really bad YouTube video essay, missing only caps. Clickbait springs eternal.
Nvidia's China Problem [pdf] (culperresearch.com)
•
I doubt anybody would defend him on the merit of his good character...
According to these allegations (May): 1. 20% of Nvidia's FY2026 compute revenue was ultimately driven by Chinese demand through intermediaries and alleged illegal diversion. 2. This was driven by Alice Huang (the spy) 3. Crucially this report has allegations that Jensen KNEW that these chips were being sold illegally, and that he even went on-site to these sites ALONGSIDE ALIBABA representatives. Nvidia is down 5.7% this morning (probably on this news), but is trading at a P/E of 23x still -- my mental math if it's expecting to lose 20% of its revenue AND a CEO that it has more to fall.
•
OMFG, it's an open secret that lots of Malaysia-, Indonesia-, and Singapore-registered businesses resell GPUs to China instead of building AI datacenters themselves. And they don't need to sleep with NVIDIA's CEO to do that, you know.
•
Well now that it's documented in writing, that business will have to be shut down (-20% revenue), somebody will have to be blamed for it (fired, arrested?), and who knows how big the fines will be.
Fold Epic Paper Airplanes (foldableflight.com)
•
As a father of 4 kids (which of them 3 are boys) this is amazing. Will start trying some new plane design tonight !
•
When I would visit my grandmother as a kid, my parents wouldn't let me bring a game console with me, and she lived in the middle of nowhere so I would get bored pretty easily. One summer, I had brought a book on how to make different paper airplanes. My grandmother had this huge crate of dot matrix printer paper [1] that I was given freedom to use to my heart's content. I made hundreds of planes, of varying quality. I even did quasi-scientific tests to see which ones would fly farther, and I used a rubber band extended to the same length each time to try and ensure I was applying roughly the same amount of force in each launch. I look back at that time pretty fondly. It was the only time in my life that I actually had fun visiting my grandmother's house. [1] Even at the time this was somewhat outdated; she had a normal inkjet printer at the time so the paper was basically useless as printer paper.
•
Adding my own story: Foldable Flight, the YouTube channel, is what allowed me to cope with Covid lockdowns with a five year old; every day we would sit together for at least an hour and fold increasingly sophisticated paper aeroplanes together. My son is now 11 and he still folds, has mastered advanced origami skills, and also has organised four yearly paper aeroplane competitions. All down to Kyle Boyer and his Foldable Flight channel. From the bottom of my heart, thank you Kyle!
Scrolled down the page, saw this "Very Easy" 1 minute plane https://www.foldableflight.com/planes/mystic Started watching the video not planning on actually making it, saw that it is done with A4 paper and grabbed a random sheet at my desk to follow along. The pocket felt like a nice "a-ha!" moment. As someone who only knew the "naive" way to make paper airplanes from A4 paper, this is the best performing and prettiest paper airplane I've made in my life! It almost feels like it's not real how smoothly it stays straight in the air compared to all my paper airplanes in childhood.
•
Is there a way to see the instructions for it?
•
I've been making the original version of this, the Nakamura Lock, since seeing it in a book as a child. I messed with tons of "world record distance" designs as a kid but this design just always came out the most consistent and had great performance. My favorite part is just the simplicity of it.
- Airplane name isn't a link (only the image) - Can't sort the airplanes - Instructions are video only
•
Scrape, AI modify, extract text, release new product.
I have a story to share. In 1978 as a preteen, my mother made me take piano lessons. God bless her for trying. Anyway, while waiting for my class in the lobby of the music school, I would often make paper airplanes. One day, an older gentleman came over and said that he wanted to gift me something. What he gave me was his copy of "The great international paper airplane book". And remains one of my cherished books or really possessions. But I'm getting older now and feel that the time has come for me to find a 13-year-old worthy of this gift. But it's quite a leap of faith, for me anyway, to convey such a gift. https://archive.org/details/greatinternation00jerr/mode/1up
•
Wow! As a kid I borrowed this book from my local library again and again over a couple years. So many good planes in there. Thanks for reminding me of it
How I felt not having square origami paper as a kid. (It's okay, I learned immediately how to rectify, uh, squarify , the situation.)
•
I sort of had the same issue, eventually went to a small local printing company. They had loads of scrap paper in all possible colours. They were very nice to me (I was a kid so that helps I guess), and I got a load of scrap paper for free. They even cut a lot of it in square size. This supply lasted me for many many years of folding pleasure.
Ginux: A New Kernel Runs Linux Userspace, Made via Human-Directed AI Engineering (zenodo.org)
A USCO opinion, and then two more confirmations of that opinion, one before Congress, is not settled? Unless the law changes the only thing licensable is the prompts.
•
USCO doesn't make the law nor do they decide what the law says, they just register Copyrights. However, registration is not necessary for a work to be protected under Copyright law. Congress makes the law then the Court interprets it, which hasn't happened yet. If choosing the position / angle of a camera and its settings is enough to gain Copyright over the images it generates then prompting a model to generate an image is enough too. I don't see how anyone can come to any other conclusion. The creativity bar for Copyright is not high. An alphabetically ordered list of customers does not meet it. Pointing a camera at someone and pushing the button does.
There was a thing, but it didn't happen often, where a GPL advocate would take an MIT or BSD license project, make some additions, license their changes under the GPL, and effectively copyleft their release of the combined work. I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think the law is simple.
•
Code exists in the Linux kernel that is licensed under permissive licenses. This works because (some) permissive licenses contain no restrictions incompatible with releasing the code and/or derivative works under the GPL. This is why the original BSD license (with advertising clause) was incompatible with the GPL, while BSD without the advertising clause is not. "Public domain" is not a license, and has different meanings in different jurisdictions, and thus it can be useful to release code under a license even if the intent is unrestricted use.
Most contributors nowadays probably use LLM. And those who don't, often produce code worse than LLM. If you're not OK with random code, you gotta rewrite everything yourself. So treat their contributions just as inspiration and work from there. And if you're OK with random code, maybe it's safer to just use LLM and ask it to rewrite the contributed code? At least you know that LLM is not ill-intentioned.
•
Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what I meant, but you expressed it better. > At least you know that LLM is not ill-intentioned. It's more complicated than that, but yeah... I see what you mean here and I agree :-). Probably the LLM is not trained to insert bugs into my repositories, I guess? But anyway, in the future I could totally imagine that some open weight models are "mainstream" and "audited", at which point it sounds harder to target my repo from the LLM than from a PR by a random account.
 Top