unwarlikeExtortion

To be honest, I'd be MUCH less against this practice if this shredding at the very least included saving the original scans at at least 300 dpi for everyone to access, freely.

Ideally, they wouldn't cut them by the spine, but even giving the despined ones to an archive/library would be just above the unpermissible line.

Despining, scanning and public access archiving is borderline permissible.

You don't get it. It was never about past decisions guiding or restricting future ones.

What precedent is: a) to be used as an argument and b) a way for the high court to set rules for lower ones to abide by... Until the next recalibration.

They can: hire locally (not a bad thing), move out of overpriced areas (also not a bad thing), pay/find closer housing for employees and negotiate better prices (also not a bad thing) or just make remoteable jobs remote.

All positive consequences of... Having to pay your employeea for their time spent for the company.

you mean

glass Glass;

which is almost worse than stringing together random fancy words.

(Edit: added backticks for that nice mono font)

Also, it's FOSS so you can always make your own skin/theme.

Not only that. Travel time should count as work time, with full reimbursement of all travel costs: gas, tickets,...

If they really feel that added cost is worth it? Let them.

Takes you three hours of travel time to get to work and back? That counts into your 8h workday, so you'll both be paid full salary for it and get to work "only" 5h at the office.

Most should quickly turn away from the idea.

Yeah sorry, saussage fingers. Fixed now.

That is everyone except a handful of designations. Everyone except babies, the dead, and the theoretically alive such as Mitch McConnel.

Also it's not as if chips alone went insanely up beacuse the manufacturing equipment did so as well. And if you're building fabs, you're not gonna do it in the US or Europe - for a reason. Even Apple gave in to "Designed in California".

From what I see, 0 = 10 on this scale.

From what I gather (someone correct me if I'm wrong), carriage return and line feed do different things.

Think of a typewriter. It has two things. A large lever you spam which lets you move the writing position towards the start of the page (that's carriage return), and a small wheel you spin which adjusts the vertical positioning of the paper (that's the line feed).

Computers were modeled after typewriters. And in typewriter logic, to start writing in a new line, first you need to return the horizontal position to the start of the current line (CR), then feed a new line in (LF).

If you just CR, you'll start to type over the text already present on thal line, and if you just do a LF, you'll start typing in a new line from the same horizontal position, leaving a large gap of unused space to the left.

Newer models of typewriters made the large lever used for CR automatically do a LF as well as a quality of life improvement, as it was hard to nail down a consistent line spacing manually.

As computer programs atopped thinking in terms of being a 1:1 logical replica of typewriters (simulating ink being stamped on the page with a mechanical arm and supporting stamping over existibg text), but ratger in terms of layers and text boxes, selecting and editing), editors lost the ability to destruxtively atamp over existing text, so CR doesn't do anything anymore.

Some systems only use LF (CR implicit) or verbosely say CRLF (what a typewriter would do).

Well... I'm quite on the fence about AI, after being against it for a while.

Your point stands. Current AI use is terrible: both the ecological disaster and mass theft they present are not small issues.

Yet these aren't a fault of the tech itself. They're the fault of the companies doing said theft, and the governments either silently or openly ebracing said theft. And economic bubble fueling the theft and the unprecedented rate of datacenters popping up.

I like to compare AI to photography. Both are/were revolutionary. Both killed jobs. Both raised copyright issues. Yet photography today is an integral part of life. And I'm afraid LLM chatbots will be as well in ad few as 15 years.

There's no stopping technological progress, even when it's actively blocked - let alone when governments feed billions into it and take a blind eye to all its issues.

So the case isn't as clear cut. You can admit defeat now, or you can wait a bit. You can be the sole hermit not using it in a world which does. Which is a personal choice for everyone. The only thing to ask is: is it the right one for an open source project?

Rejecting "known unethical" tools does seem like a sensible approach though. Either make your own, use a known-good one or do things the old fashioned way. No leaded gas in our vicinity allowed.