That's why he's mocking Zelenskyy. He could've sold his country to Putin and gone skiing, but instead decided to fight.
boonhet
joined 2 years ago
"resign or be fired" talk
LPT: If you get this talk they don't have the shit to fire you with cause so they want you to make a mistake and resign so they don't have to pay you severance.
It's only CSA if it's democrats and democrat-aligned donors doing it, otherwise it's a god-approved relationship.
The real answer? They use people in countries like Nigeria that have fewer laws
IT HAS KNOBS IT HAS KNOBS ITHASKNOBS OHMYGOD
Sorry, I got a bit over-excited. I hate capacitive touch controls in absolutely anything with a passion and I in particular hate them on my stove because I don't want my stove to start beeping when I wipe it, nor do I want the controls to malfunction any time they get wet because I accidentally overboil the water.
Receives Software Updates
I feel iffy about this part though. I don't want my stove to have software on it.
Tbh I feel iffy about the whole thing. 6 grand plus tax, software updates... And how does the magnet knob thingy work? Can I be sure it's as reliable as a normal knob?
Would be lovely, but what I'm afraid is going to happen is that you have to stop in order to change the climate settings because some idiot bean counter told the UX and engineering departments to find a way to save money so they got rid of the climate control module and put it in the infotainment screen. And the passenger can't even change the song while driving because they got rid of the forward and backward buttons too.
Mandate physical controls for everything that the driver has a reasonable need or desire to touch while driving (climate, seated heats, horn, etc). And then also do what you suggested in addition to that. Can't let car manufacturers have too much free reign.
Tesla was the trailblazer, but what's worse is that everyone else followed. Now Mazda of all companies is kind of a trailblazer in getting back to sanity (there were articles about them ditching touchscreens or at least touchscreen-only setups a couple of years ago already).
What's really funny to me is that even so-called premium German brands went to pretty much full touch. Used to be they'd put in the engineering time to make buttons feel more solid to push and nowadays they just give you a big slab of touchscreen you can't even feel properly while driving.
Everyone is just pinching pennies because touchscreens are cheaper than buttons.
I've thought of creating a tracking-free app for modern cars that would be vendor agnostic so if your family has 2 or 3 cars from different manufacturers, it'd still be the same app instead of 3. But even if I do no tracking, the car company will still track the vehicle, they only lose out on the data from your phone, which likely isn't nearly as interesting for them anyways.
Huh? The goal of the chromium project was to facilitate a corporate browser in the first place. It's why they don't have a more permissive license. They want to be able to use everyone else's work if anyone forks it.
Permissive license doesn't mean that corporations suddenly get the ability to completely change existing work for the worse, or change its' license. They can bloody well do that with GPL too if they own the project including contributions, so it doesn't matter if it's BSD or GPL, the only protection that the open source users have, in any case, is that licenses can't be changed retroactively, so if Firefox, Chromium or Ladybird went completely closed source and proprietary today, we'd still have the right to use the code as it was yesterday. Permissive licenses just mean that someone somewhere can create a closed source build without the permission of the person or company who owns the project and that doesn't particularly matter for anyone using Ladybird or any future open source derivatives. Permissive licenses are useful for libraries, but also for software that could be bundled as part of a bigger solution. Maybe you want to embed a web browser in your proprietary application and don't want to use webview because its' usability differs platform to platform.
Also why AGPLv3 and not GPLv3? I don't think the "A" part is even necessary here, that's needed more for server side applications, I.e if the end user is using online without the code running on their own computer, AGPL is the one to use.
Anyway, in the modern age, (A)GPL is used by a shit ton of corporate software. Oftentimes with an (A)GPL open core and a bunch of proprietary functionality not included in the core. I should know, I work with one example on a near daily basis. This way, nobody can just take their core functionality and develop a closed source alternative, while they can sell you an enterprise license for full functionality on their "open source" software.
How do you prove any of those points for a return? Presumably they don't show anything while in motion and it does drive so how does it not fulfill its purpose?
Instead, you can return it in 6 months when the engine is blown because it's a piece of Stellantis garbage.
Obviously it's the deep liberal swamp state's fault. Trump's going to make Canada pay for it.