I’ve found Jami from another comment a few hours ago, but I haven’t downloaded it yet. But I think it expects an existing internet/network connection, where Briar seems to be focused on getting messages across through any means available.
I’ve never used it, but I’ve heard of “Jami” that is supposed to operate in a similar fashion.
AFAIK, yes. Latest release is from March of this year, and they have commits as of a month ago.
Are you familiar with Briar?
Works over internet, TOR, local wifi, bluetooth, even “sneakernet”.
If a die is weighted, the first roll is no longer 1/6 probability to get a 7
Yes, actually, it is. No matter what the first die lands on, there is a 1 in 6 chance that the second die will land on the corresponding value necessary for a “7”. You could glue the first die to the table with “6” (or any other number) showing, and there will be a 1 in 6 chance that the second die will bring the sum to 7.
Weighting one die (to favor “6”) will increase the probability of every outcome over 7, and will decrease the probability of every outcome under 7, but the probability of rolling a 7 will not change.
Either way…never seen a racist ghost. Which I think has to be statistically impossible.
Hetty Woodstone (“Ghosts”) hated the Irish.
DQ has surprisingly good chili dogs. Their burgers aren’t bad, if you omit the ketchup.
For your web browser, Add this to your uBlock Origin block list:
lemmy.dbzer0.com##.title:has-text(/nytimes.com/)
You can add additional sites, separated by pipes like this::
lemmy.dbzer0.com##.title:has-text(/nytimes.com|theverge.com|404media.co/)
(Change the leading url to that of your own instance)
This will turn this:
into this:
So you don’t accidentally get interested in a bullshit paywalled article.
History is written by the victors.
Ok, I’ll try again:
Again a solved problem, just make a decent GUI for your application.
You are promoting monolithic design. You completely fail to comprehend Unix philosophy:
- Expect the output of every program to become the input to another, as yet unknown, program. Don’t clutter output with extraneous information. Avoid stringently columnar or binary input formats. Don’t insist on interactive input.
GUIs are only used for human/application interaction. They are not needed for application/application interaction. While it is not unreasonable to have a GUI for interactive input within your application, it is infeasible and undesirable for a GUI to be needed for your application to interoperate with other applications.
Go ahead and create the GUI if you really want, but expect your users to want to call it from a shell script. Give users the capability to automate away unnecessary manual interaction, and allow the machine to take up that pointless busywork.
So googling how to do someone, copy/pasting command is better than finding it in GUI?
Oh, absolutely. Especially for a one-off setting that you might never look for again. There’s just no sense in wasting the time building up a complex GUI to handle every possible interaction a user could ever want to employ.
The solution to the “problem” of “needing to use the terminal” is to retrain the user to understand how limiting even the best GUI can be, and to greatly prefer the terminal.
So, my suggestion is, rather than try to hide away the terminal, it should be featured prominently, exposing the limitations and shortage of command line applications available to windows users. An effective, powerful, well-supported terminal is one of the major benefits of Linux.
Are you suggesting users with no programming experience can simply add the flags they need to a terminal application but would be unable to do the same with a GUI because the GUI is the barrier?
Yeah, why not? I’ll go ahead and make that suggestion.
I mean, the terminal allows them to ctrl-c, ctrl-v a simple solution developed by someone else, even if that someone else didn’t bother to build out a GUI for applying their changes.
The convoluted steps they would have to take to achieve the same effect with a GUI would seriously hinder the GUI-only user.
What I am really saying, though, is that the problem of “needing to use the terminal” is not actually solved by ensuring that every possible setting can be accessed and manipulated with a mouse.
I’m saying that the best way to solve this “problem” is by pushing the user to expect and even demand the terminal. Distros should autolaunch a terminal window at startup. Put it right out there, front and center. Invite the novice user to interact with it with friendly little toys like fortune, cowsay, sl, toilet, espeak. The insane usefulness of the various shell tools are more than enough to keep them using it.
BlueShell
Generally speaking, anyone can correlate the two.
I mean, when a piefed user and a piefed shadow account participate and vote in the same thread, it doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to conclude they might be the same person. Look through a handful of the user’s comment threads, look for piefed users voting in the preceding comments for confirmation.
Unless the user only votes in threads they do not participate in, and only participates in threads they do not vote in, correlating the two accounts is trivial.
Smaller charities tend to do much better in my experience.
UBI is not charity. UBI is what the nation owes you as a shareholder of USA, Inc.
Giving people money doesn’t teach long term skills that lead to success.
Exactly. Which is why the children of rich people so often become homeless. All that money they had when they were kids kept them from learning long-term skills that lead to success. It stunted their financial growth, rendering them particularly susceptible to poverty.
The children of the impoverished, on the other hand, were forced to learn money management skills for their very survival. The superior money management skills of impoverished kids practically guarantee their future success.
This explains why self-made millionaires are so common, and generational wealth is so difficult to maintain.
Right? That’s how it works in your head, right? The people with easy access to money never learn how to manage it and ultimately squander it, right? The people who have to fight for every dime are the most successful, right?
Right?
I also think it would be better to have private organizations that have less bureaucracy.
Agreed. And an organization doesn’t get smaller or privater than a single individual. We can cut out 100% of the bullshit bureaucracy and give it straight to the individual, directly, or their caregiver if they are not qualified to maintain their own affairs. Remove everyone else, as they don’t add shareholder value.
Indeed.
Each of the issues you described is mitigated - if not cured - by steady income. And each is greatly exacerbated by a lack of such income.
What is really important is that the family and friends of the people struggling with these conditions aren’t also impoverished. The outcomes of each these conditions are vastly improved when the sufferer’s caregivers have the time and resources to attend to them.
UBI benefits everyone involved.
For the cases where the individual is not capable of managing their own money, it is still better for their caregiver to receive and manage their money on their behalf than to periodically send them crates of cauliflower and tomatoes.
With open source, the delineation between “user” and “programmer” is arbitrary and capricious. The GUI-centric Windows approach reinforces that artificial distinction; the terminal breaches that barrier.
Setting search is a solved problem, you simply search for the setting name in the UI,
This assumes the developer bothered to make that setting available through the UI.
With the terminal, that isn’t a problem: You’re using the same UI as the developer.
An effective terminal is a feature, not a bug. Every Linux problem has the same solution: search the web, ctrl-c, ctrl-v.
No navigating through “settings” and “preferences” and “tools” menus to figure out where this particular developer decided to hide that particular setting. Just copy and paste, problem solved.
Well, not with that attitude.