Plants do communicate and form social bonds. (quick internet search : https://theconversation.com/plants-thrive-in-a-complex-world-by-communicating-sharing-resources-and-transforming-their-environments-156932)
I don’t really care about mediocre developers infightings. Bad dev chose to depend on 3rd party code because they are not good enough to code a left pad function. Bad ecosystem is being used by said mediocre devs…
I don’t need all of this to make my web application. If tomorrow npm is dead I can switch or even code an equivalent myself. I keep my dependencies at minimum and use tools and library such as npm as ways of doing things faster. Not doing things I don’t understand/can’t do myself.
If people dislike npm ways of doing they can easily code a better one. Actually several alternatives exist.
If you have security concerns you can had additional check such as inhouse code review of packages and save hash of said version. You could even share this knowledge with trusted partners in a common database.
We have other issues were laws (patent) or economic system (entrepreneurship) is a real barrier to better solutions. My point of view of this matter is that it is mainly a lack of skills and bad culture.
This seems to be clickbait as no distribution would properly work: https://social.treehouse.systems/@AsahiLinux/109931764533424795 .
I didn’t know this omglinux but the lack of source/explanation is worrying.
This company looks like ‘technology will fix everything’ startup. I could be wrong. Feels really hyping over final product idea and no concrete idea of needed infrastructure/cost. I don’t take planes, not sure how much of it is really needed. I wouldn’t mind avoid the awful pollution made by planes over cities, have 0 trust/hype about those project.
In the end this isn’t even the main environment problem we are facing. There are many easier and more impactful changes that could be made with less resources : energy, food, materials.
Coming from Europe there’s a lot of stuff but not necessarily in English… America or UK never were that much into socialism so…
Recently Arcane, made from a french studio, is filled with political ideas about revolution, imperialism and much more (LGBTQ+) for instance.
On top of my head I can mostly think about all the YouTube channel I am watching.
Just yesterday even a channel like ClodFusion, witch is far from being socialist released a video about the wierd stop of General Motors EV in the 90s. Big argument against current capitalism.
PS: nothing to do with Snowden though… To the contrary of the what OP is asking most of artists are against surveillance. But in fact this is not about socialism, we can see some movements/ideas going for socialism AND surveillance.
No one is going to spend the resources to DDOS you. Also those attacks are temporary, they are a plague when having a website unreachable means money loss. For instance anyone can DDOS my blog I wouldn’t care, even for a whole week (I have IP bans mechanism btw).
I don’t mean the main concern of privacy is not relevant, just the DDOS specifically shouldn’t concern hosts unless they are making daily profit from their website traffic.
There are many layers we could talk about when we say “privacy”.
First about IP:
There’s also traffic monitoring:
The op question makes no sense to me though. Torrents are just file you want to get/share, there’s no privacy involved in that. Maybe they meant torrent clients.
The article is very nicely done, the website too (beautiful while not being overly bloated). The topic is also interesting even though I hope people here would already know about that. Still nice to remind us of the battery production’s externatilties.
Reading the other comments it is true that pointing fingers at China seems very hypocritical even though what’s being said is true.
Reading the article I didn’t had China in mind. I mainly thought about how cars are not the solution to transportation, EV or not, Chinese or not. This specific bias with China may be caused by the fact that the organization is specifically meant to talk about technology related topics outside USA/Western Europe.
I would still judge this as above average compared to the mainstream journalism I can observe.
The question is already biased here : you could have ask if we think everyone SHOULD be vegan.
If you say ‘needs’ it is hard to understand what do you mean and it pushes the idea of forcing people which puts a negative light on the end goal.
'Need` for what? The environment crisis? Sustaining a certain amount of people/growth? Ethical concern?
Obviously any vegan will want others to be vegan, the same way any capitalist wants everyone to be capitalist, communist the same, etc. The opposite works too, non-vegan won’t be happy to be forced into veganism.
In my opinion the better question is asking if we should be vegan. Now everyone can participate to the debate without feeling forced. Also trying to push rules on people who disagrees is not the best way usually, it is tolerable when they are in extreme minority.
The vegan question has been talked for many years now and beside conservatism there are not a lot of arguments against veganism in theory. The practice is way more difficult, especially with current communication being held by weird billionaires and democratic processes being crushed all over the world.
I am sorry I don’t see any debate here, I hope I made my point clear.