ignirtoq

And this horrible story of uprooting not only your life but your entire community and its history to flee the rising tide is going to be one of the better stories. These islands are "lucky" to be part of a nation that is based on a continent and has room it can move these people to.

There are many entirely island countries that will have to evacuate to other countries. Maybe some other countries will offer some of them somewhere to go, but I guarantee it won't be enough. And it's going to accelerate. And it's going to be happening at the same time some continental nations in the equatorial region will be evacuating north due to extreme heat or other extreme weather.

Scientists have been warning this was coming for as long as they've been warning about climate change. And it's here. It's starting now.

I don't think our current system is nearly as robust as you think. Trump's first term laid that bare.

So many laws dictating what the president can and can't do don't have any actual repercussions for breaking them written in them because it was assumed impeachment would be sufficient. Trump showed that with our current system that means if you can't guarantee you'll have 67 votes in the Senate, then those laws may as well not exist. And every week the Supreme Court shows how much "settled case law" isn't anymore, so with a corrupt high court in his league, even the laws that do have teeth may be subverted.

We absolutely need to make changes to shore up the system and plug the gaps, but we have to do so with care that we don't end up handing new, more powerful weapons to the very bad actors we're trying to protect against.

Totally agree. These systems are critically important for our society. They need to be considered with care, and we need to be mindful of the complexities that come with any changes to them.

Super easy for those in power to keep their rivals from being able to run for office. Currently the president and afraid you'll be unseated by the opposing party's candidate? Just start an investigation on them! Boom, no more rivals.

No, that's the opposite of what I want to happen. If they "divest" that means they're selling their stake in the company to someone else, who likely cares less about climate change. The company stock doesn't just disappear. Shareholders are the only ones in our current system who can have a meaningful impact on companies they own shares in. The people who hold companies to climate expectations are exactly the ones I want holding stock in those companies.

Agreed. Carbon capture is absolutely an important tech that we should deploy after the cheaper, better solutions of removing carbon from our economies. Carbon capture should be the final phase where we help the Earth heal the damage we've done after we stop doing the damage. We need to first implement those stop-doing-the-damage phases.

But people aren't using the web the same way they were at inception. These big companies have built closed source, centralized systems on top of the decentralized infrastructure to serve new use-cases that weren't envisioned in the original standards. People like these new use-cases, so we need new standards, etc., to facilitate a re-decentralization of data and features in these new use-cases if we want the most used parts of the web to maintain their openness.

I don't think it's fair to lay the blame on the common user for the centralization of their data, when only the centralized systems have been providing the capabilities they want until very recently (where the open alternatives have arisen partly because of new standards like ActivityPub).

The attack vector described in the article uses the VPN client machine's host network, i.e. the local network the device is attached to. They don't discuss the DHCP server of the VPN provider.

People go through stages as they fall into the conspiracy theory rabbit hole. Early in the decent they are still engaging in healthy reasoning patterns that I won't go so far as to say are "logical" or "rational," but they are still flexible enough to be diverted from the conspiracies. There's always a reason they start down that path: maybe someone close to them got badly sick, maybe they just had a child and are seeking out the best ways to protect them. If you can sit down with them and engage with them on this underlying cause for concern in an empathetic way, that's when you can change their mind and keep them in the zone of legitimate science and medicine. If they react to every discussion as a confrontation, they are beyond the point that bringing scientific evidence to them will change their mind.

I hate this basic assumption that privatization will lead to cost reduction unless proven otherwise. Cost reduction is a question of optimization of process combined with requirements for quality. You can either make what you're doing more efficient or reduce the quality. The military can be extremely efficient when it wants to, so I'm not surprised at all that when outsourced to the private sector, costs didn't go down. There was probably just no room to optimize given the existing requirements, and then private companies had to make a profit, so quality had to go down.

Not a line, but I saw Matrix: Revolutions in theater on opening weekend. During the 1-on-1 fight with Smith in the rain, there's a slow-motion shot of Neo punching Smith in the face. It's such bad CGI the entire theater burst into laughter. I'm pretty sure it was intended to be dramatic, but after seeing the latest Matrix movie and how tongue-in-cheek it is about itself, I'm not entirely sure anymore.

Oxford English Dictionary