#RMS wrote a statement: https://www.fsf.org/news/rms-addresses-the-free-software-community . First thing about this whole debacle that makes me somewhat optimistic for the future.
My current phone is literally falling apart, so I need a new one. I m pretty confident I want a #pinephone at some point in my life, but I'm not sure it is ready to be used as a main & only phone.
I bet there are people in the Fediverse who can help me with information! I want to know how much hassle, on a scale from Ubuntu to LFS and beyond, it is to setup the following functionlities:
1. Phone calls, making and receiving (has to be reliable).
2. SMS, sending and receiving (has to be reliable).
3. A #matrix client, with graphics (I have a weechat session on my server, but looking at pictures using only it would be a pain).
4. A (the?) #signal client.
5. Some #openstreetmap -based navigation (OSMAnd?).
6. And, of course, a #fediverse client (currently using Fediab).
Any other suggestions, information, and criticisms about the #pinephone are very welcome.
Boosts obviously appreciated.
I didn't make reports since day 1. On day 2, I sent and received a few sms texts. On day 3, I spent an hour on a phone call with my dad (he got vaccinated the day before, yay!). The internal speaker was on the quiet side at max volume, a known issue for which there's a tweak. The back of the UBports CE was very hot by the end. It might be useful to swap the back cover with the Plasma Mobile version which has a graphene tape inside.
GCC does not satisfy the "one month" requirement: that's why we need better compilers (and languages)
But this IS a political issue!
If you cap complexity, you reduce costs and this way you reduce the power corporation can extort to users.
If you can rewrite anything you run in a month, no company is going to betray your trust.
As for the "simplicity ideology with complex compilers" you are talking about, I think you are confusing simplicity and easiness.
Simplicity is very different from easiness: simplicity provides freedom, easiness produce lock-in. But more often than not, simple tools requires more mental effort than easy one.
IMHO simplicity should always be preferred in Free Software.
Source of the latest points: https://twitter.com/sputnikvaccine/status/1380158709985329155
Well. Personally, I totally agree with the view that the conditions and scrutiny for admitting this vaccine shall be the same as for other producers, but Russian producer thinks otherwise and thereby withholds important information. They obviously try to force other countries to use this on the basis of plain belief that it works as marketed. And these antics about requesting it to be sent back, well… If they fully refund it too, I guess it should be OK. We learned something new about vaccine politics here though.
There is also considerable movement around @matrix within administration
plus cities jumping on the https://publiccode.eu/ train
Maybe refering these processes helps integrating a wider federation narrative; esp. in dir. of the whole EU with Matrix in France etc
The Most Important Scarce Resource is Legitimacy - https://vitalik.ca/general/2021/03/23/legitimacy.html excellent post by @VitalikButerin
, creator of the most interesting/important cryptocurrency, #Ethereum (v @azeem)
A colleague mentioned today that the April Fools tradition of pranking unsuspecting people into believing something false can be very unwelcome on the receiving side. That made me think of better ways to observe April Fools and I think I've found a slightly Discordian one that I wish I'd thought of years ago.
Let's share puzzles/riddles that often leave the listener very confused and help them realize that something they might have believed about the world is inaccurate. I think it's much better, because it's educational, there's no temptation not to ask the recipient whether they wish to take part beforehand, and I don't expect recipients to feel like they're being made fun of.
Let me start with a physics puzzle I'm fond of:
Consider a car that travels northward with speed v. Assume there are no losses (no rolling friction, vacuum, etc.) so the car travels at constant speed with engine off. At a point in time, the car engages its engine and speeds up to 2*v northward. How much work did the car engine do?
Well, we can compute the increase of car's kinetic energy: m/2*((2v)^2-v^2)=m/2*3v^2
Alas, let us consider a different (inertial) reference frame: one that moves northward with speed v (note that it's not tied to the car, even though it starts stationary in it). In that reference frame the car sped up from 0 to v, so the increase in car's kinetic energy is m/2*v^2.
What gives? How much energy did the engine actually have to use to speed the car up?
h/t to Ryszard Zapała, my HS physics teacher
Celebrating my first commit making it into the mainline Linux kernel: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/drivers/usb/typec/tps6598x.c?h=v5.12-rc4&id=3cac9104bea41099cf622091f0c0538bcb19050d
Lines added: 0
Lines removed: 1
Can I call myself a "contributor" now even though technically I didn't add anything, just removed one line? 😃
“Ruby off the Rails: Code library yanked over license blunder, sparks chaos for half a million projects • The Register” https://www.theregister.com/2021/03/25/ruby_rails_code/
Selected machine learning attacks; first in a series.
2. Looney Tunes
The last contribution to #Signal's server software was on April 22, 2020. Due to the sudden commit drop to literally 0 it is no longer possible to seriously call current Signal versions fully open-source.
That has no effect on the messenger's end-to-end encryption or its overall security but it does compromise the trust in the Signal Foundation, especially when considering that they did not give any reason for not disclosing the source code.
The ergonomics of modern proof writing just get better and better.
This is just a proof about a C program. Nothing in the program is important from a philosophical standpoint. But the logic and implementation is swell.
The logic is called higher-order impredicative concurrent separation logic. The separation part allows me to only have to think about small parts of the C program at a time. Multiple people can work on the same proof without stepping on each other.
The implementation allows for a lot of automation in proof writing. Most of the heavy lifting and boring stuff, like interfacing integers to registers of 64 bits are done. There is plenty of room to create more automation for common proof strategies.
#chatcontrol is an EU plan to spy in real time on *all* your communication, including encrypted messengers like Signal. Let me put it bluntly: If the state doesn't trust me, I will never trust the state. This is unacceptable. Period.
There is a nice example for weaponized language in contracts and politicians:
What native speakers familiar with contract terms understand: you make no guarantees or commitments in the fulfillment of something
What non-native speakers or unfamiliar with this term understand: wow, they committed to maximum effort
So the EU official complaining about AstraZeneca deliveries not being “best effort”: they were exactly that! Bottom-barrel, no guarantees service.
QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves. A STEM-oriented instance.
An inclusive free speech instance.
All cultures and opinions welcome.
Explicit hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.
We federate with all servers: we don't block any servers.