• 0 Posts
  • 23 Comments
Joined 4 years ago
cake
Cake day: December 27th, 2020

help-circle
  • Talent and the capacity for determined effort, sometimes called ‘grit’, depend a great deal on one’s genetic endowments and upbringing.

    This is where I stopped. Yes of course, genetics. So there’s no hope, let’s not aim for meritocracy.

    You see, this is the line mediocre people won’t cross. Just because you have bad attributes doesn’t mean you don’t have to work hard every day. You just need to compare yourself the right way, with the right people.

    I know a guy from Senegal who with only 25 years old has lived in more than 5 countries. He’s dumber and poorer than me. Yet, he’s accomplished more in life than me.

    Don’t be fooled by these articles. Someday you will be old, and you will think, “What have I done with my life?”. You may not have done much, but you will regret not having made an effort every day of your life. And this is the only thing that counts at the end of the journey.




  • Because it’s the best browser out of the box. It has pretty good default settings, good anti-tracking features (see https://privacytests.org) and doesn’t need any extension installed. Every shitty feature (Reward, Wallet) can be disabled. Brave also has a clear business model, which is not based on user data.

    LibreWolf, another fantastic browser, is a better choice when it comes to privacy, but lacks the security features that Brave inherits from Chromium and can’t auto-update unless you’re using a package manager. So it’s pretty much pick your poison.

    The marketing and advertising arguments come from people with heavy biases. Mentioning Qtbrowser is a joke, and Ungoogled Chromium does nothing special to protect your privacy (and has CRLSets disabled for whatever reason, while Brave proxies them)

    PD: don’t use the Tor feature on Brave, stick with the Tor Browser




  • You can, you have to do it. When someone’s doing software, ask yourself software related questions. You just can’t go with “this guy’s Trump supporter” or “this guy’s a communist”. Just forget about it as long as the software doesn’t reflect those facts (you should never have or care about that information in the first place). Stop politicizing software, stick to the technical aspect of it. Imagine science like “this paper is brilliant… but it’s from someone tied to a political scene we don’t support, so we’ll just ignore it”. How stupid is this?


  • RandomSomeone@lemmy.mltoPrivacy@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    So? Who cares? What has your comment anything to do with software? The most up voted comment on a software post is some political whining. Why should anyone care about what devs are doing in their personal life? I didn’t see that level of criticism when Tusky devs blocked gab.com in the app for ideological reasons, which is actually very concerning. Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you?


  • RandomSomeone@lemmy.mltoOpen Source@lemmy.mlThe Software Thief
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    3 years ago

    Imagine, for example, an open-source software license that ensured that when used by a company, the highest paid employee of that company could not earn more than 100x the lowest paid employee, or a license that ensured that half of the profits produced by the software were distributed evenly among the employees of that company. Imagine a license which dictated that profits gained from the software had to reflect price reductions for consumers

    So some kind of socialism. No thanks.

    This is much simpler: as users, we should be able to own the software we have (whether we bought it or not). This is non-negotiable. When you buy a car or a washing machine, you can take the whole thing apart and fix it if you want to. Software should be no different, and therefore, the intruder here is proprietary software, a privilege, a concession that is given to all of us but completely undermines the market. That is the root problem.


  • The UBI is a huge unnecessary expense in developed countries and an impossibility in developing countries. It is a terrible idea, especially if the aim is to have quality public services. In addition, it can discourage active job search and/or the inability to hire someone. On top of that, the market would simply adapt to this measure by raising prices.

    To get out of poverty, stop drowning people in taxes, allow a wide contractual freedom and above all, eliminate the privileges of some oligopolies by completely withdrawing patents (like closed source software) and eliminating millionaire subsidies. In this way, the playing field is balanced by introducing more competition and allowing wages to rise where they need to rise.









  • If you have 5% of the worlds wealth, then you are morally responsible for 5% of the worlds misery, regardless of whether you are aware and even if you disapprove of the specific injustice

    This is a fallacy. A rather obvious one.

    If you have 5% of the world’s wealth, you are 5% responsible for all the wealth generated worldwide based on that percentage. In other words: if you don’t generate more than 5% of the world’s wealth, you are parasitizing the rest (probably for personal interests).