This government is corrupt to the core, with individuals in it wanting a piece of the pie for themselves. Anthropic wouldn't share, hence the reprecussions.
It is an extreme edge case and the argument for a sane government oversight is still perfectly valid. No oversight makes corporations dump waste into the water supply and market asbestos-lined cigarettes. It's naive to think that no oversight is needed.
That would be JR Conlin, national treasure. Worked with him on YDN in 2007 and Netflix in 2009; veterans of the Netflix API team will never forget his hack day entry, which was "Mac and Me" playing on a toaster oven.
They still have not fixed their build system. Meson/ninja or cmake would be alternatives. Nothing to have them abandon mozconfig ... this is legacy code. The rest of the world moved on. Mozilla lives in the past.
Could not agree more. I am honestly confused by the need for more than what FF/Librewolf offers and have been actively doing frontend for a long time. Plus no hassle with uBlock. And their Focus mobile browser is nice. I have the same complaints about their leadership as most but at least I feel I have some autonomy with their browser.
It's not a joke. The Pimpzilla theme stopped working due to changes that Mozilla made to Firefox's layout system, and I dropped Firefox for Safari. Never went back.
Fwiw, I've been using Firefox for 20+ years, I hate ads with passion and yet I never heard of your add-on until just now.
I don't remember what I've used before uBlock Origin, but since its appearance it's basically solved the ad blocking on Firefox and became the de-facto standard for the browser.
You probably lost all your users to it, rather that they all stopped using FF.
One whose author saw the direction of society towards numbing entertainment very clearly.
There’s a book written by David Lipsky where he followed and interviewed David Foster Wallace (author of Infinite Jest) upon the release of Infinite Jest.
I think a lot of what "universal praise" means is just peer pressure and people making their Identity fully around the art they consume. A lot of it is also marketing and pushing tastes into culture.
A key part of how to see if someone is just parotting acceptable opinions vrs is actually having an opinion, is to make them explain it. If its a generic "oh you need to read it, its great" or parotting of popular talking points, that person is not serious about their taste. They use the art as an ornament to make their personalities more interesting than actually engaging with the art in any meaningful way.
The only reaction that matters should be your personal one and what resonates with you.
This might be survivorship bias, the people who read and enjoy a difficult book for the sake of it probably don’t need social media validation to do so.
or it might be marketing and sales trying to push that book, right? I am not sure what you mean by social media validation though. Telling people what they should like and what they shouldn't like with an external motive to make them like things you sell, is much much older than social media. Blindly engaging with that and basing your views on it is not optimal was my point.
Exactly, our identity is the sum of our influences and I also agree if someone actually engages with the art and has their own views on it, that is a good thing.
My comment spoke more about how society just drip feeds us influences via marketing and with an external motivation. That means they are screwing with our very identity itself. My point is that curating those influences is important and shaping your own identity instead of basing it on universal acclaim, reviews, "what does the world think/what must be the right way to think".
It is an extreme edge case and the argument for a sane government oversight is still perfectly valid. No oversight makes corporations dump waste into the water supply and market asbestos-lined cigarettes. It's naive to think that no oversight is needed.
reply