Are they? I watch YouTube on Firefox all the time, seems fine on my machine.

I think maybe 5+ years ago there were some performance issues caused by YT relying on features that were only implemented in Chrome, but I don’t recall having any issues wrt that for years.

Totally agree with you, this stuff seems to happen much less at demonstrations where there is an organized group with some security plan.

I have a couple of thoughts regarding this.

First, in America at least, we spend a significant amount of time and energy legitimizing “nonviolent, civil disobedience” actions of the past , while pointing at any group that defends itself in any other capacity as just as bad, or worse!, than the status quo/gov/cops/take your pic. There is only one valid way, outside the ballot box, to demand/make change within liberal society and it is to literally demand that the gov/cops/military/local assholes beat you so badly that other onlookers are too embarrassed to let it carry on. This method is lovely for the ruling class because they can physically squash the people with demands and, if they are few enough of them, the protest ends, and the ruling class get several more years to run things.

As an extension of above, protest organizers, and some protestors, explicitly know that the cops are there to escalate the situation. To avoid escalation many people simply do not defend themselves or others.

This is all vibes base analysis based on my own experiences at protests, including ones where cops escalate the situation. I wouldn’t take it too seriously.

How many fights have you started with that GNU Nano sticker? Seems like a fun (“fun”?) way to make new friends and enemies.

I assume no one at this point

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ones'_complement

You’re right about the Snopes article. It does do a decent job of pointing out that a lot of this reporting is rumor based.

This first anecdote (also highlighted by Snopes) is amusing

Double-hit cases" have been around for decades. I first heard of the “hit-to-kill” phenomenon in Taiwan in the mid-1990s when I was working there as an English teacher. A fellow teacher would drive us to classes. After one near-miss of a motorcyclist, he said, “If I hit someone, I’ll hit him again and make sure he’s dead.” Enjoying my shock, he explained that in Taiwan, if you cripple a man, you pay for the injured person’s care for a lifetime. But if you kill the person, you “only have to pay once, like a burial fee.” He insisted he was serious—and that this was common.

So is it Taiwan or the mainland with these wild laws?

Another false claim about China, it seems.

Thanks for the links, it’s much appreciated

Woah, definitely need to check this out. I wanted to slap guix system on an old laptop but had issues with proprietary drivers, very curious to see what workarounds people have had luck with. Otoh I barely touch this computer, and NixOs is running fine on it…

I’ve seen this in comments a lot but never a source, do you happen to have one?

Damn, could have been a real one. Smh

In addition, hardware developers reinvent old ways of doing things and only learn by making all the same mistakes that have been made before. It’s sad, but true.

This same criticism is validly launched at software devs all the time lol.

One thing I’ve anecdotalally seen and heard is hardware guys indicating that something is rock solid and solved because it’s old, so building on top of it isn’t a problem. Obviously we have to build on the old to get to the new, but if we just skip auditing hardware due to age we end up deploying vulnerable hardware globally. Spectre and Meltdown are an interesting example where I’ve heard from at least one distinguished professor that “everyone” believed branch prediction design/algorithms were essentially done. Was it adequately assessed from a security POV? Clearly not, but was it assessed from a security POV in general? I have no idea, but it would be nice as a tech enthusiast and software guy to see the other side of the fence take these things seriously in a more public way, in particular when it comes to assessing old hardware for new attack vectors.

Same, but on any forum. Trying to just force myself to reply to things once in a while like I’m doing right now

Unrelated 3rd party gets mad at 1st party for transaction with 2nd party. 4th party (neighbor of 2nd party) steals transacted item on behalf of 3rd party. Seems legit.

I figured US sanctions in this case would just limit which companies can interact with US based companies and within US borders, isn’t that how sanctions on Cuba work? Obviously the US just does what it wants but it’s not clear to me how this was legally justified, if at all.