Notices by dead_man@dill.burggit.moe

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo could be. Not sure actually.

I just heard variations of this online so I'm just repeating it

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo I wish I could touch that octopussy :ablobcatrainbow:

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @Forestofenchantment@clubcyberia.co @sun@shitposter.world it's probably because, back when that came out, only a fair few PCs had USB 2.0 ports. The majority had older versions of the standard.

3.0 probably never even was a thing at that time

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo good luck with that. I still don't understand Eva after 30 years and not because of lack of trying

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @Ree@shitposter.world @Pi_rat@shitposter.world @Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com @lolitechengineer@loli.church I also remember. I don't miss the old internet precisely because of stuff like this

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @snacks@netzsphaere.xyz @Suiseiseki@freesoftwareextremist.com @phnt@fluffytail.org actually, most hardware components are protected by patents which are legally enforceable in most of the world.

You cannot copy a piece of hardware even if you have the equipment and skills to do so, for legal reasons

@sun@shitposter.world mainstream social media in a nutshell. This is why I appreciate the fediverse tbh. You can have any mix of schizo opinions and stances, and nobody's going to bat an eye at you

@sun@shitposter.world I strongly suspect that the whole anti-AI crowd are just a vocal minority of the internet. When all is said and done, most people are indifferent to it

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @aetios@sns.minovsky.space I think the point is that the word "proprietary", in this context, is almost synonymous with "money making".

A company saying that they're developing proprietary software that is successful is akin to someone successful saying he has a secret that allows him to become wealthy. Investors want to hear that, since it inspires confidence.

Conversely, "open source" is almost seen as toxic for investors, since it makes it clear that there will be little to no return in investment, since the work of thr developers is seen as being given away to the community for free

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo why do I feel old now :lolicry:

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @cell@shitposter.world that's probably the wage for working as a McDonald's employee

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @fiore@brain.worm.pink Fairphone 4 owner here, too. And a proud one.

I already fixed some broken parts of it and I'm very happy with it. I also have LineageOS on it and it simply runs flawlessly.

Great setup overall

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @fiore@brain.worm.pink yeah, the lack of a jack is annoying, although I got used to it over time.

The large form factor is unpleasant. I wish Fairphone would make a smaller model one day

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @yomiel@new.asbestos.cafe @grips@cawfee.club @Pi_rat@freesoftwareextremist.com honestly? That's based.

You're actually based for this. Respect

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @yomiel@new.asbestos.cafe @grips@cawfee.club @Pi_rat@freesoftwareextremist.com the only time I wished I used Chrome is when certain websites just don't work in Firefox, because of lazy devs. I guess that's one incentive for why people make the switch

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @yomiel@new.asbestos.cafe @grips@cawfee.club @Pi_rat@freesoftwareextremist.com I think I'm probably one of the few people on this planet that likes Firefox. I don't know. I'm not gonna die on this hill. I just don't see why people are switching to Chrome

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @Pi_rat@freesoftwareextremist.com @grips@cawfee.club @vkc@linuxmom.net I'm gonna disagree with you there. I've been using it fine for the past couple of years and I've never had anything that I'd say is missing from the feature set.

I genuinely don't know why people say it lacks in features

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @Pi_rat@freesoftwareextremist.com @grips@cawfee.club @vkc@linuxmom.net well, the thing is, not for profits need money too, to operate.

They don't exist in this bubble where they are immune to capitalism. Being non-profit simply means that the profits they're making isn't going to someone's pockets. Software engineers working for them still need to be payed

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @Pi_rat@freesoftwareextremist.com @grips@cawfee.club @vkc@linuxmom.net the slogan is just a PR thing.

If you're advocating for them to do work for the community for free, you're effectively wishing for them to go bankrupt.

Sure, they do make money off of Google paying them to make the Google search engine the default one in their browser, but as Firefox becomes less and less influential in the browser market, that source of revenue is becoming riskier and riskier every day.

Mozilla is seeing the writing on the wall on this one. I think that it's healthy for them to divest their resources in other places. The browser market is just not profitable anymore, now with Google Chrome being a monopoly and all

@SuperDicq@minidisc.tokyo @Pi_rat@freesoftwareextremist.com @grips@cawfee.club @vkc@linuxmom.net this is gonna make me sound like an asshole, but why should they?

You're saying they should drop everything else they're doing and focus on the one project that's not making them any money. Isn't that counterintuitive to the whole purpose of a company?

Reminder that Firefox is free software. Every bit of work they're putting into it is effectively given away to the community. They won't see any return on investment from it.

Even assuming they did have the money to continue working on Firefox for the foreseeable future, why should they continue to work on it for free?