This has always messed with me to explain, but mostly since this confusion is based on different experiences. If you learn the theory and understand how to craft your own circuitry, pushing and pulling amps can be designed for, but if all you’ve ever done is install things like a contractor would, then all you’re familiar with is pulling amps.

It always makes it such a hard explanation when someone says, “I thought you pulled amps.” There really ain’t an easy explanation, since most people are only familiar with systems designed to not be used outside their target voltage, so they don’t experience Ohm’s Law in action.

In retrospect, its probably because I only have these talks with contractors lel, and they’ve spent a whole lotta time going with the “Pulls amps” approach, and it works out well enough for them. Whatever works for the groups you’re communicating among, I suppose.

So, I’m not necessarily going to toss out a rule suggestion, rather a dynamic that I’ve found that I feel is worth noting.

In rules-bound communities, spaces flourish and perform the best with next to no rules. This however induces the problem of having people who speak out in ways that’re unwanted. Juxtaposed to this, spaces with overbearing rules often drive users away and create a “hush-hush” zone, where organic conversation cannot truly occur. You may’ve seen this often with a sort of “positive vibes only” places, where everyone seems to speak with a face of ^w^ and nothing else.

I have always had a bit of a philosophy towards this after seeing several discord servers’ communities, and then having a large community of own. In a nutshell, our rules performed best when boiled down to “Be good.” Not everyone has a clear definition of ‘good’, so we tossed out a few examples, but that’s all for rules on vocalizing the self. There were more, but that’s just because the server was NSFW-friendly, and only had regards to that.

Not to say this approach works everywhere, but I feel openly saying that “Good rules, but minimal rules” is a good summary in a nutshell.

It’s nice to see these remarks every now and then, really throws humanity back into us amidst our anger. Sometimes I think world leaders could use a bit of that lol

For all I bet most of us know, he could be a big POS, but he could also be someone normal who just happens to be son of a world leader. I just don’t forecast getting worked up over the political life of a no-name son is quite the healthiest approach.

So, I wanna support the Onion network, but it seems hosting a middle node is the most likely way, and thus have the largest base. In looking into it, exit nodes seem very dangerous to those who’re uneducated on the risks of having them, and thus are a big bottleneck.

Not to say this is a bad problem to have, as it’s a growing pain and that indicates an increase in popularity, but wouldn’t wide-scale adoption of this disproportionately limit the usability of the Onion network through the exit nodes?

I was gonna say, much as I wanna do work from home myself, I’d say the whole gestures broadly at everything economic during COVID definitely has a bit more of an impact on company profits during that time period.

Real quick, does anyone want this? It’s another competitor in a rather centralized market, so it’s good we’re seeing some adequate competition, but the product they’re pushing is designed specifically for “AI and cloud workloads”. Their marketing towards datacenters seems to indicate the AI focus, but at the expense of performance to non-AI applications. In a nutshell, I do believe it’ll excel with AI, but “Cloud workflows” sounds like marketing lingo for “Lol this CPU can’t handle heavy tasks.”

Yeah, it’s all speculation from me here, but if manufacturers are pressured to drop AMD for Nvidia’s CPUs, this seriously looks like the first significant push to a standard where your computer only exists to access a server, where you don’t own your own services.

It takes a bit of personal analysis into the product’s direction to see this stuff coming. Cape was founded and rapidly advertised in sponsorships, YT ads, loads of influencers, etc. Say it with me now, that sounds like investor capital! Truth be told, y’all should probs check for those signs when seeing adverts or sponsorships, it can tell a lot about the behind-the-scenes connections of the company.

This is in comparison to, while not perfect (nor exactly the same product), Phreeli, which doesn’t appear to have this massive investor capital money behind it, thus a lesser budget for advertising.

That’s kinda what I’m trying to get at. Like yeah, it sucks to see, but between being worried about this v.s. an additional 10% tariff globally, one of those will impact my life much more substantially.

Gotta be real chief, I’m gonna oppose the crowd here and ask it: What’s the big deal here?

Like, its definitely not a good look, but is this really significant enough to devote any mental energy to?

Edit: okay it took a crapton of digging, but there’s a better link now.

I do gotta admit too, this’ere was the first time I’d heard of a Surface Linux. Is it basically just like a scaled-up Linux phone, or are there some quirks to it?

This is probably it, but it’s just so unfortunate that there’s a constant loop that can be solved by just not entrusting a single centralized company to it:

> Find a good service

> Good service turns sour

> Find a new good service

> Good service turns sour

Like man, I’m just now getting some people to selfhosted Stoat + Matrix, but I just know once some investor-backed competitor arises, some of 'em won’t even give Stoat a chance for development to catch up.

I’ve been going down the Linux/FOSS rabbit hole for a year at this point and hot dayumn does it just keep getting better. I seriously wonder how/why self-hosted forms of social media and apps haven’t become the norm.

I don’t know anywhere near the full scope of this industry, but what seems to’ve been the case so far is that Lithium Ion battery recycling isn’t really happening because not enough batteries have died yet, to sustain a company in that industry. Which y’know, bit of a good problem to have, but it’s also a problem that Lead-Acid batteries had toward the early phases of their use. As was the case then, it took time for enough batteries to die to sustain an industry in battery recycling, and even moreso exacerbated with Lithium car batteries having a longer lifespan.

The interesting part is that once we have enough batteries to sustain the market, a very small proportion has to be manufactured from raw materials to makeup for product lost in the recycling process. This has Lithium in a weird state where we currently heavily rely on its extraction, yet as far as the auto industry is concerned, it won’t be too terribly long in the future when we’d have the baseline supply we need.

Anyways, no clue if that’s truly their approach or not, but we’re at a point that I feel it wouldn’t be entirely unjustifiable to consider.

As far as my applications for open-sourcing goes, AI has actually done a good number on assisting it.

I’m a DIY sort of person, and use a lot of software for things like ESP32 boards to complete niche tasks. The problem is that very many applications just didn’t have some preexisting code made for it, so it took a much larger load for me to try programming it by hand. In recent years, I’ve had a much easier time finding software for things, and sure enough, many of these projects have some mention or disclaimer about AI.

I know AI brings its own problems with it, namely that of code produced with lesser-optimized techniques, but the alternative I had to deal with was simply no premade code at all.

That being said, many of these projects did die out after AI was implemented, but not because the community was less interested, or the developers were less caring. These projects died because they reached their end goal, they did exactly what you needed it to do, no more or less. Far as I’m aware, that sounds like a successful outcome.

I have pondered this a little, as to why this seems to be the route the administration is taking. The best explanation I’ve had is that Trump is taking a card from China’s playbook.

Several years back, China weakened their currency with the goal of creating an environment that’s more embracing to external companies wanting to setup manufacturing plants in their borders. With how this administration is speaking about boosting manufacturing, I can see these two narratives being in conjunction with one another. The problem I see here, though, is that those jobs were spurred on by lower wages as a result of that weaker currency, which I don’t quite see as a goal the US should be striving towards.

Yes, given enough time, it’ll pay itself back off, but this still seems like a subpar avenue, especially as one of those American workers that’ll feel the impact. Whether that’s truly the result or goal is anyone’s guess, best I can do is speculate.

Not certain right yet since one of the lads are ill, but I’m trying to see Zootopia 2 with 'em! Likely gonna be having a drink with them after, our New Year’s seem to’ve really mellowed out throughout the last few times, one of the bad parts of growing up is that it seems harder to party like I used to.