The Communication Cube


@Farox In order to not derail the other thread - why is twitter/x to be avoided?
For me it always was to be avoided. There are too many reasons to list, but limiting speech to 180 characters, or 280 or whatever is so brain dead, that only that would be abhorrent.
There're more things, but I may not be authorative because I never used it: polarisation, addiction, egolatry/individualism, centralisation, masterful mindlessness...
Genuine question - I've never used either. Only heard the notion that there's less or no censorship happening now.
Did you? I heard otherwise. I heard many censor staff was fired, so that might mean less censorship, but that now accounts were cancelled or so more whimsically, just because a boss didn't like it.
And if ever was some mechanism to refute cancellations or takedowns, now would be even less of a recourse.
On the other hand whatever they had to verify identities or something (or eventually just posting) would now be cancelled and replaced with some payment, so it sounds like more censorship for the poor, less for the rich or professional viral spreaders.
But I don't go to such places, so what do I know?
 
@Farox In order to not derail the other thread - why is twitter/x to be avoided?
Genuine question - I've never used either. Only heard the notion that there's less or no censorship happening now.
For me i don't want to support the direction that was taken when Mr Musk bought the company. I have an account but i almost never used, so most probably this would be deleted as inactive (i didn't checked).
 
For me i don't want to support the direction that was taken when Mr Musk bought the company. I have an account but i almost never used, so most probably this would be deleted as inactive (i didn't checked).
Some insight into the direction would have been valuable as part of an answer. Nevermind though. Not invested in that platform, just curious.

@pyrat I can only assume that Musk would ban accounts that were flaming him or the service. Dunno if that's the case.
I also heard that there is now a thing like correction by the community, which can put a lid on some company or state outlet's ravings by correcting their statements. That sounds like a good thing to me.
Not sure about having to pay for veryfication. I assume it helps to prevent bot-farms.
 
@pyrat I can only assume that Musk would ban accounts that were flaming him or the service. Dunno if that's the case.
Flaming him ? Ok, this is very subjective and possibly unfounded, but I think he just got the whim to buy Twitter because a user was posting there the airports he (or his plane) was landing on, which was already public info.
And taking into account the amount of info from people travels that Tesla accumulates, it didn't tick me right.
He's just whimsical.
I also heard that there is now a thing like correction by the community, which can put a lid on some company or state outlet's ravings by correcting their statements. That sounds like a good thing to me.
I heard nothing of the kind. But I don't trust that any more than a crowd with torches and forks.
The deeper problem might be thinking there's one truth to be assessed, but I can't think it thoroughly because I start laughing as soon as I associate a community of 280 character sputterers with a quest for truth.
Not sure about having to pay for veryfication. I assume it helps to prevent bot-farms.
I guess it prevents poorer bot-farms?
bot-farm becomes a question of budget ?
So it prevents some, but does it prevent the worse ones ?

I don't like Musk, and I think I didn't like twitter already before Musk, so for me it just went from bad to worse.
But that said, I don't have good enough info, and I'm no twitter user, I don't want to, and I kind of find that some form of mental disease of some kind, with due respect to mental diversity.
So people shouldn't take my views too seriously.
 
Say hello to Peony's replacement her name is Melissa. Don't mention anything to Peony she doesn't know that shes being replaced and I want to tell her myself.

Fjp5eU0i.png
 
The range of possible mistakes in designing a complex FDM part is staggering.
Quoting Blood zombies - "MORE BRAINS".
Yes, please. XD
 
World War 3 confirmed?
Yemen's Houthi rebels (indeed not neighboring Israel) appear to have declared war on Israel: https://www.reuters.com/world/middl...-aircraft-near-red-sea-city-eilat-2023-10-31/
"Yemen's Iran-backed Houthi group said it launched a 'large number' of drones and ballistic missiles towards Israel on Tuesday, after Israel's military said it downed an approaching 'aerial target' off the Red Sea city of Eilat. The operation was the third targeting Israel and there would be more, Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Saree said in a televised statement. Saree said the attacks would continue until 'Israeli aggression' stopped, referring to the war against Hamas in the Gaza strip."

"Iran's Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian issued a threat on Sunday that the United States would see 'heavy losses' and warned Israel with a deadline to end its military actions toward Gaza."
Source: https://www.newsweek.com/iran-issues-ominous-threat-us-deadline-warning-israel-1834798
 
Last edited:
  • Sad
Reactions: rSl
Yemen's Houthi rebels (indeed not neighboring Israel) appear to have declared war on Israel: https://www.reuters.com/world/middl...-aircraft-near-red-sea-city-eilat-2023-10-31/
"Yemen's Iran-backed Houthi group said it launched a 'large number' of drones and ballistic missiles towards Israel on Tuesday, after Israel's military said it downed an approaching 'aerial target' off the Red Sea city of Eilat. The operation was the third targeting Israel and there would be more, Houthi military spokesperson Yahya Saree said in a televised statement. Saree said the attacks would continue until 'Israeli aggression' stopped, referring to the war against Hamas in the Gaza strip."

"Iran's Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian issued a threat on Sunday that the United States would see 'heavy losses' and warned Israel with a deadline to end its military actions toward Gaza."
Source: https://www.newsweek.com/iran-issues-ominous-threat-us-deadline-warning-israel-1834798
Nah, WWIII was last week, now it's just trick-or-treating...
 
A summary:
The article highlights the importance of respecting user freedom in software that controls medical devices and discusses various incidents involving proprietary software in devices like hearing aids, insulin pumps, and pacemakers. It points out the vulnerabilities and issues users face when relying on proprietary software for their medical devices. In one example, users of the LibreLink app experienced problems monitoring their blood sugar levels due to a software update. The article emphasizes that free software would offer users more control and the ability to address such issues themselves or with community support.
It also discusses the challenges of proprietary software in hearing aids and the potential for abandonment by manufacturers when warranties expire. It mentions the case of eye implants, where users are left without options when the manufacturer abandons the technology. The article argues that free software in medical devices can benefit patients, the environment, and the healthcare system by allowing for longer device lifespan, bug fixes, and updates. It also highlights existing free software projects for hearing devices and insulin pumps, and it suggests that the free software community could contribute to the development of free software for pacemakers. The article concludes by advocating for the use of free software in medical aids to empower patients and enhance the reliability and security of these devices.
 
This isn't Reddit you know, people here generally tend to read the article. :p
That is an assumption I would assume. Anyone who wants to read the full article is free to do so. If the link ever fails they don't have to wonder what the article was about.

In other news, I've let Peony pick what YouTube videos we watch today and we've somehow ended up watching Matlock. I'm open to offers if anyone wants to take her off my hands.
Matlock is fun, but like most series (maybe that's just me) you can watch a few episodes and have to stop and do something else.
To stay in the theme, you could watch some Jake and the Fatman to have some variation.
 
Why is it that many people take issue with or get angry from hearing GNU/Linux (or as I like to call it, "GNU+Linux") being reffered to as GNU/Linux?

What really bothers me about it is that people get angry when GNU/Linux is reffered to as "GNU/Linux", because supposedly that is GNU taking too much credit, but they are perfectly fine with Google naming their Linux-based system "Android". So GNU may not even share credit with Linux but Google may take all credit and completely remove any mention of Linux from the name.

Why grant Google this unfair favour? Google is the one spying on us, trying to control us, and trying to make us dependent. GNU is the one protecting our privacy, helping us be more free, and helping us to be independent. Yet we bend over backwards to critise GNU for taking fair credit and to allow Google to take credit we would normally deem unfair.

If you think "GNU/Linux" is giving not enough credit to Torvalds because it only credits him with making the kernel, how about going after Google first who does not even credit Torvalds for that in the name? And then come back when Android has been renamed to what it ought to be it's true name (according to these people, since they also normally claim that the kernel is the only part worth creditiing): "Linux".

Another one I hear is that GNU/Linux does not exist because Alpine does not use GNU. This one also bothers me, it is like saying that your bicycle is not a bicycle because my vehicle is car. Sure Alpine is not GNU, but how does that make e.g. Debian or Guix any less GNU? I could just as well say that Android is not Android because Guix does not use anything from Google (besides a browser and maybe a few other non-essential stuff but even that has been de-Googled). But Android (or as I like to call it, "Android+Linux") is still Android even if other Linux-using systems are not.
 
Why is it that many people take issue with or get angry from hearing GNU/Linux (or as I like to call it, "GNU+Linux") being reffered to as GNU/Linux?
Because they don't like GNU.
It reminds them that they chose wealth over morals. They prefer to see themselves as successful than contemplate the open issues. Either because they don't think those issues are important, because they think they're not more important than business interests, or because they think they are misguided views and against their interests. Or because they fear if they thought about it they'd agree to those ideals but realise they fail to live up to them, and the world is uglier than they want to see.
They still use GNU software, because they're used to it, because it's more convenient for some use case of them than BSD or Alpine or Android or whatever, but they refuse to call it GNU, because for them GNU is Voldemort, he whose name shall not be spoken.
This is too childish to openly admit, so they're quick to build arguments like GNU taking too much credit, or there're being alternatives to GNU or euphonism or whatever.
So, that's enough mind reading for me today, folks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rSl
and it suggests that the free software community could contribute to the development of free software for pacemakers.
Great, now I'm imagening someone making their pacemaker step to the beat of the music their hearing aid perceives. Wonder how that would feel.
 
making their pacemaker step to the beat of the music their hearing aid perceives. Wonder how that would feel.

Pffft they'd be fine. :)

 
Back
Top