There was a good discussion online between Christine Lemmer-Webber, one of the editors of the ActivityPub W3C Standard, and Bryan Newbold, protocol engineer at BlueSky.

• CLW - How Decentralized is BlueSky Really?
• BN - Reply on Bluesky and Decentralization
• CLW - Re: Re: BlueSky and Decentralization

These are long reads. But they are worth reading. Christine and Bryan agree that ATProto and ActivityPub have different design goals and so what you get from “federation” with each is different. ATProto makes a centralized index of the entire system possible, at the cost of relying on very few (practically likely one) centralized providers.

As a result, the Lemmy ecosystem, as it exists today, wouldn’t be possible with ATProto. It would probably look more like Reddit, but with a “credible exit” possible as a defense against enshittification.

The entire premise of this piece is that it happens consensually within the law. Secretary Krasnov-Trump of the 47th Oblast is not known for respecting consent or the law.

The outcome we have to be wary of is forcible annexation. Trump only respects strength, so the right thing to do is to be strong. Trump’s reaction to Ontario’s energy surcharge is proof that we’re on the right track—it’s him whining “no, I’m stronger”. We have to keep showing Canadian strength in response. Not aggressive strength, but a forcible “no” with enough oomph to back it up.

He’s a bully. He’ll give up when we’re no longer fun and hand the file over to someone who will be willing to negotiate. Then when a deal is reached that is almost exactly where we were in December, he’ll claim victory for bringing Canada to heel.

Peace, Order, and Good Government is the right goal. But right now all three of those aims require paying attention to Trump, not ignoring him.

The fight for justice, democracy, and civility knows no borders. You (singular), and those who fight against oppression will always be our brothers/sisters IMO.

We know you’re there, and we know who we are and aren’t booing when we boo the Star-Spangled Banner.

I think I can speak for most Canadians if I say we’re sorry that standing up for ourselves means hurting you, but we’re not sorry for standing up for ourselves.

I’ve been saying “Canadians are nice by choice, not because of something in the water.”

I like this one, too. I intend on stealing it and spreading it. #ElbowsUp

I think Trudeau is best when he gets to lead a country, and not have to deal with politics. I mean, he’s not the best policy maker, IMO, but we’ve had worse PMs. Whenever he has to do “politics” stuff though he’s… well, bad.

Thanks, consider me a +1 on your internal prioritization. I know that a lot of places offer DNS management for free (because it scales so well) but I’d be willing to pay a nominal fee to have it be Canadian. I’m already paying right now to have it managed on a hacker-run service rather than a large corporate service.

Do you provide managed DNS hosting?

I’ve got a couple of droplets I would probably move, but I’d like to centralize my NS record provider first.

Didn’t have to be real, just scary to the powerful.

(Not commenting on truth of whether it happened or not, just a generalization of my observations of the behaviours of the powerful)

There isn’t just one christian god. Who the christan god is depends on which accounts you consider.

It’s easy to read the old testament, read the post-gospel books, listen to the 2000 years of doctrine, and come away with the opinion that the christian god is evil. If you just read the gospels though, and accept that part of the message is: “I’m throwing out the old deal, the new one is Love One Another,” it’s harder to maintain that argument.

I was raised Lutheran, and am currently a philosophical agnostic. I know people who have an internally consistent belief in a good and loving christian god based on how they interpret the entire body of work (they’re well studied). I also believe their definitions of “good” and “loving” would align with yours.

New thought just now:

• If the christian god is a singular entity and is evil, then it must exist
• If it doesn’t exist as a singular entity, the only thing to criticize is people’s conception of it

Sorry for the long reply. You got me to extend my thinking and that came out in the comment.

RIP to all on those flights.

VASAviation has the raw ATC audio. If you’re not used to listening to ATC, read the comments for interpretation. Lots of experienced folk there.

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiOybe-NJHk
• https://youtu.be/r90Xw3tQC0I

In general, the aviation industry doesn’t assign individual “fault” the way many do. It’s taken as a collective responsibility. It seems at this stage that there’s a lot of responsibility on the helo pilot, but there’s also some communication ambiguity. Let’s let the pros do their work and not jump to conclusions.

I don’t frequent that world much these days, but I personally preferred the agent/pull model when I did. I can’t really articulate why, I think I feel comfortable knowing that the agent will run with the last known config on the machine, potentially correcting any misconfiguration even if the central host is down.

The big debate back in the day was Puppet vs. Chef (before Ansible/SaltStack). Puppet was more declarative, Chef more imperative.

I also admit, I don’t like YAML, other than for simple, mostly flat config and serializing.

I further admit that Ansible just has a bigger community these days, and that’s worth something. When I need to do a bit of CM these days, I use Ansible.

So wait… Did Puppet have a license change as well recently? Is this just preemptive because it looks like Perforce is starting to change things?

The Free Software Foundation requires “CLAs” as well. I have no fear that they’re going to rug-pull. I don’t think we can use that as the indicator. IMO, it’s even a good idea to have a CLA so that’s no conflict that the project owns the code.

The warning for me is if the project is run by a company, especially a VC-backed company. Joplin isn’t, so I would be comfortable using it (although I don’t).

JIRA Data Center: What am I? Chopped liver‽

https://www.atlassian.com/enterprise/data-center/jira

Agreed that JIRA is… not the greatest tool.

Not really. It sounds like they haven’t gone after them for emulation, but instead for emulation-adjacent things: copying ROMs, circumventing digital locks, etc.

They explicitly mention (one of?) the developers of Yuzu sharing ROMs in the article.

In other words, the emulator itself isn’t illegal, but in order to use the emulator the way most people want, you have to do illegal things, and that’s what they go after you for.

N.B. I originally went looking for a reason that maybe it was okay that Andy Yen was giving the thumbs up to Gail Slater. I thought this was an unfair internet pile-on. I think now it’s a fair internet pile-on.

The official @[email protected] account replied and doubled down

[email protected] - @jonah

Corporate capture of Dems is real. In 2022, we campaigned extensively in the US for anti-trust legislation.

Two bills were ready, with bipartisan support. Chuck Schumer (who coincidently has two daughters working as big tech lobbyists) refused to bring the bills for a vote.

At a 2024 event covering antitrust remedies, out of all the invited senators, just a single one showed up - JD Vance.

1/2

[email protected] - @jonah By working on the front lines of many policy issues, we have seen the shift between Dems and Republicans over the past decade first hand.

Dems had a choice between the progressive wing (Bernie Sanders, etc), versus corporate Dems, but in the end money won and constituents lost.

Until corporate Dems are thrown out, the reality is that Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses.

2/2

(Less importantly, my response)

Which documents, you say?

What happened?

Shredded, you say?

How badly?

To bits, you say? Oh my my…

Technically, you’re correct. In this particular case though, I don’t think it’s the best kind of correct.

Juries are the triers of fact when present. In a civil case, that means the judge can ask all kinds of nuanced questions in the jury instructions, as that could be necessary for the judge’s application of the law later down the line.

In the US criminal justice system, the laws are meant to be interpretable by the common person (a lot of work being done by “meant-to-be”). A judge only asks them a single question: For the charge X, how do you find? Since juries do not need to justify their decision, they can use whatever reasoning they want to behind closed doors to reach their decision: facts, ethics, or flipping a coin. The lawyers use voir-dire to try to exclude jurors that would be too biased, or would be willing to use a coin flip (juries almost universally take their job seriously—they hold the freedom of someone in their hands.)

As mentioned elsewhere, an acquittal by a jury in the US is non-reviewable. It doesn’t matter why they acquit. Convictions, OTOH, are reviewable, and judges have famously thrown out guilty verdicts from juries before.

If you listen to the news segment, it talks about security completely and not about chnaging the corporate zeitgeist around the priority balance between workers, customers, and shareholders.

Hear that whooshing sound?