To be honest, other than the argument of “everything is political,” I get where The Verge is coming from.

When I was a kid about ten years ago, it felt like EVs were uncontroversial and just the next logical step for cars. I don’t remember nearly the same levels of backlash. People in my family on both sides of the political spectrum didn’t really care too much one way or the other on them.

Now it feels much more scrutinized, both by people on the right who don’t typically care about environmental issues, and some leftists who want transit instead. And that scrutiny tends to be pretty harshly worded.

Maybe it’s down to factors like the costs of EVs. They’re damn expensive so I could see why people would get more frustrated at them. Though how they’re “woke” escapes me.

respectful counterpoint: marketshare is important, especially if we want to get more users to use ethical softwares instead of corporate controlled proprietary messes.

that doesn’t mean this particular issue needs to adapt to a Windows-style approach (and in fact it already can with flatpakref files, AppImages, etc.), but dismissing accessibility to people unfamiliar with Linux or dismissing having a goal of increasing Linux usage is harmful to the longevity of desktop Linux in society, and harmful to the goal of competing with the monopolistic, proprietary platforms that currently dominate.

bc why just have HTTP requests and plain text when you can c l o u d S a a S

yeah, OK, I didn't realize QAnon had outright financial scams out of it. Wow.

(Found this research on one particular scam - helps put it into perspective. Linking for anyone else who might be unaware)

Yeah, another commenter made the point of very elderly people, which admittedly I might not have the best perspective on needing to handle. They would probably not notice, and it would probably not create any real issues.

My reaction was more if you tried to do this to a normal, younger to middle aged person - where I would suspect if the filtering were to come to light, it could create some very nasty conflict. But also in that case I'd suspect anyone trying to reach QAnon material is more likely intentionally trying to get to it, versus some 80-something who might have one Q moron in their Facebook feed that sends them somewhere no one ought to go.

OK, I guess that's a valid edge case. Still, I'd be wary of how that would really work out - if they were to become aware that you were filtering the internet, I would suspect that could lead to some really bad conflict.

Though, for the very elderly, yeah they probably wouldn't notice. There's some nuance there I didn't think about.

I mean, that would be kinda crazy, and I also don't think it would do any good to try and filter them. Like, you've got conspiracy-driven right wingers under your domain - no matter what way you spin it, you're dealing with shitty people. You're either going to bring them to a fever pitch in an argument over you blocking their internet access, or you're going to give them access and have to deal with them perpetuating their harmful views to you and all around them.

If you're at that point, better to consider whether or not you really want those people in your lives.

If you're in a situation where you can't cut those people off, what do you expect to achieve other than a different form of conflict by inhibiting their internet access? If you're going to be quiet about doing it and hope they don't understand, is it really healthy to be pulling those strings and manipulating like that? Hell, I'm not even sure it would be ethical, I feel like that kind of manipulation would be really shitty to do, even to shitty people and their shitty views.

EDIT: I'm of course assuming the adults need "protection" because there's no path to just, like, discussing things healthily. If there's a healthy way to discuss... that should really be the preference.

Fully agree.

I’m not really sure what to make of this - I’ve been hearing people both bring up that he sold stock in isolation, and I’ve heard others say this is part of a routine pre-planned stock sale. Presuming he’s not performing obvious inside trading, I imagine it’s the latter.

I know capitalism bad and unity CEO bad, but is there actually anything to this? If not, why does this keep getting brought up? (I mean this as an actual question, not loaded)

Death Stranding is super interesting to see. Hope this marks a new era of decent mobile ports.

Congrats! That’s awesome and I’m glad you got through it :)

Isn't it a shame, then, that you won't really be able to do this unless you're a developer with a Mac who can sideload it. Almost certainly visionOS will have the same draconian restrictions that get placed onto iOS's App Store, and almost certainly no sideloading for non-developers either.

This headline just kinda depresses me. It's super cool work that everyone should get to mess with, but it seems like Big Tech is intent on allowing for zero fun, all in the name of security and anti-piracy.