Senal
@Senal@programming.dev
- Comment on Google reacts angrily to report it will have to sell Chrome 15 hours ago:
Depends on what issue they are trying to fix.
Chromium is a problem but it doesn’t seem like that’s what they are trying to address here.
I was talking about the technical monopoly wrt to rendering engines and web standards, Chromium is a problem but it doesn’t seem like that’s what they are trying to address here.
From that article it seems like they might be trying to separate chrome in hopes that that will enable the new owners to “decouple” it from google search.
If that’s the case it’s a dumb move if it’s the only move they make, all that would happen is google would just build the new owners a scrooge mcduck swimming pool to make google the default search. Same thing they do with firefox.
It even says that in the article.
It would be interesting to see how they’d deal with the decoupling of the built in google proprietary panopticon bullshit.
They’d struggle to shift that over to chromium without upsetting…well…everyone.
- Comment on Google reacts angrily to report it will have to sell Chrome 21 hours ago:
TL;DR;
They have an effective monopoly and have repeatedly shown they will use it to serve their needs.
One concrete way is the level of control that google has over the inner workings on the rendering engine giving it significant control over web standards.
A real life example fo this is the controversy around the JPEG-XL format, google decides to drop support for it, doing so removes support for every single browser based on the rendering engine in chromium (eventually).
Now, other browsers ( firefox for example) have to decide if it’s worth it to add in and maintain support for a format that will only work in their rendering engine.
Sounds like a win right? now firefox has a feature that chrome doesn’t.
Now, developers/businesses have a choice.
- A: Add/Maintain/Test features that use the JPEG-XL format exclusively, this feature is only available to the Y% of people not using a chromium based browser.
- B: Use some other format that is supported in chrome (and other browser).
- C: Do A with B as a fail-over, adding additional cost to development/maintenance and testing.
In almost all circumstances, B is the fiscally responsible option, which means that google has effective control over web standards and their implementation.
A non rendering engine example is ad-blockers, google decides there are underlying security issues with how some integrations with the web browser works, this “just so happens” to break how almost all decent adblocking is done at a browser level.
They go ahead and create an updated version of the specification that describes how this interaction works, implement this upstream and suddenly all chromium based browsers now can’t use the most effective adblockers.
Technically the downstream browsers could do some shenanigans to keep the ability to block ads effectively , but the technical and monetary barriers to such an endeavour are so high it is absolutely not worth it.
There is more technical nuance to this story, the security issues are real in V2 but the need to break adblockers in process of fixing these issues is debatable.
- Comment on I just WON'T 3 days ago:
- Comment on gotdamn 4 months ago:
That “rape aside” is doing a lot of heavy lifitng there and conveniently sweeps away the need to actually address anything that isn’t the “had sex, your fault” narrative you seem to be espousing here.
Especially given that there is little to no effort being given to exemptions of any kind.
Nobody is denying that sex is how babies are (usually) made, i mean apart from the “this book is the literal truth” christians i suppose.
or you’re trolling, in which case, congratulations…i guess.
- Comment on Schools won't be allowed to teach children that they can change their gender ID, reports say 6 months ago:
Interesting, thank you for taking the time to write all of that up.
- Comment on Schools won't be allowed to teach children that they can change their gender ID, reports say 6 months ago:
Do you have any information on how easy the resumption of puberty is after that sort of delay?
It never occurred to me that this was possible and I’m interested in how it might work.
- Comment on Schools won't be allowed to teach children that they can change their gender ID, reports say 6 months ago:
Labels aside, the only thing that post contains is a personal opinion, a personal anecdote and then an unspecific reference to something that may or may not exist.
Calling that an argument is a very generous interpretation.
- Comment on Schools won't be allowed to teach children that they can change their gender ID, reports say 6 months ago:
The overview had no mention of a lack of support for “not transitioning” it’s certainly possible I’m missing it or it’s in the full report (which I’ll read when I get a few minutes).
One mention of the need for corresponding levels of support for de-transitioning and some mentions of increased support for other issues alongside the gender based ones.
It sounds like OP had a specific section/sections in mind, if this is indeed the report they were referencing I’d appreciate some indication to which part they were referencing specifically.
“The overview didn’t mention it, but its somewhere in this 232 page report” isn’t the most useful when trying to understand where someone is coming from.
- Comment on Schools won't be allowed to teach children that they can change their gender ID, reports say 6 months ago:
The UK has recently done research on the matter and realised that children were not getting the support required for not transitioning.
Citation?
- Submitted 7 months ago to selfhosted@lemmy.world | 1 comment
- Comment on An invitation to agree 8 months ago:
Hyperbole doesn’t strengthen your already flimsy argument, but I suspect that wasn’t the intention so, you do you I suppose.
- Comment on Finland detects more GPS jammers as drivers increasingly try to hide their tracks | Yle News | Yle 8 months ago:
Unless you’re a big corp, then fuck with impunity but make sure to pay the “cost of doing business” tax.
If the tax is too high, just buy some lobbyists or political system equivalent.
- Comment on Lemmy.world Should Defederate with Threads 11 months ago:
And you’re free to do so, that’s the entire point of a decentralised system.
They aren’t making decision for anyone but themselves, again, as is the point.
If you don’t agree with whatever they do, find an instance you do agree with or start your own.
Staying or leaving has the same amount of personal agency.
- Comment on We Can’t Hire You. Developers’ Challenge 11 months ago:
I’m talking anecdotally and from my experience here, not as an absolute.
I will upfront admit i am somewhat biased against authority in general, especially what i perceived to be unearned authority (if you wish to be a respected authority, earn it and continue to do so) In this case however I’m talking about “authority” in a professional sense somewhat measured against the success or failure of particular projects or initiatives.
For the most part i agree with you but it seems like you are using the term “anti-authoritarian” as an absolute, as in being against authority is bad in all cases.
At a lot of companies “Critical thinking and standing up for your ideas” is considered anti-authoritarian because the company culture doesn’t allow for that kind of autonomy of thought (by design or long term evolution usually).
Your example works in the context of a company that works in a manner that promotes/encourage that kind of person, not all of them do. My personal experience and that of my circle of colleagues and acquaintances, I’d guess that percentage is around 30/70 with the 70% being companies that either actively or passively punish/discourage both of those types of employees.
Which i’d imagine is what @bouh meant when they said “But good employees will hate your company, because you consider them like bad ones”
Anti-authoritarianism is a bad trait. when the authority in question is doing the correct things (for whatever definition of correct you wish to use). “Anti-authoritarianism” and “Critical thinking and standing up for your ideas” are not mutually exclusive.
As with most things it’s contextual.