To those who missed the small disclaimer in the post, 1.0 is not properly released yet. RC4 is out, actual 1.0 release should be "sometime [this] week" (barring new bugs and regressions). See: https://blog.freecad.org/2024/11/14/freecad-1-0-release-candidate-4-is-out/

Edit: Release is out now: https://blog.freecad.org/2024/11/19/freecad-version-1-0-released/

Of course, Alabama school, it’s entirely possible that the lesson was complete nonsense.

Nah, from a solely US perspective it's correct. There were ~1.6 million military casualties in the civil war, and ~1.07 million in WW2. But there were a few more parties involved in WW2, so it's kind of weird to frame it as less bloody. If you include civilians, estimates range from 70 to 85 million dead worldwide (not including the >20 million wounded soldiers and unknown number of wounded civilians).

Ohhh, that's what they meant. Thanks for clearing that up, I was really confused by that unexpected US defaultism.

The US Civil War eclipsed both in the number of casualties.

Uhh what? Wikipedia says ~1.6 million casualties (including wounded, ~650k dead) in the civil war, while WW2 has 24 million military deaths alone.

Indeed. We shall find out it seems.

Well for lack of a better comparison, it's kind of like a Trump rally. Not quite, of course, the style Trump applies is tailored to the current American sensibilities, with his silly little dances and whatnot. But the way he wields anger and hate and "patriotism" to get a rise out of the crowd seems very much alike. And yeah, it's sadly undeniable that Hitler had a talent for this. Greater one than Trump maybe.

$ tar -h; echo $?
tar: You must specify one of the '-Acdtrux', '--delete' or '--test-label' options
Try 'tar --help' or 'tar --usage' for more information.
2
$

Lemon squeezy.

can’t see how this can possibly be a good thing, you know it will mean funding with conditions.

Well, the things they are funding will get funded? How is that a bad thing?!

The conditions range from very broad, like "fix bugs" (curl), over somewhat specific like "improve cross-platform compatibility and the Linux RNG" (Wireguard), to very specific like "create a test-suite and drive development on the Fediverse account migration functionality" (ActivityPub).

You can see more for yourself at https://www.sovereign.tech/tech

All of these seem to be rather tame conditions that are just there to ensure the funds get used in the way they were intended to be used. And I don't really see how that gives the STF any sort of direct control over these projects, while it gives those projects resources to achieve more than they might have otherwise. There are no long-term funding models that would enable implicit control over these projects.

They could set up an account on one of the larger well established Canadian instances or even better start up their own.

Both of these options have their pros and cons, and I think it is important to explain these well to the council if you want to have any hope of convincing them.

A line of argument that has had some success in Europe is what has become known as "Digital Sovereignty", basically a fancy term for saying government should control its own infrastructure. So you might want to sell it as an easy way to have a permanent archive of public communication and a method for it that is under their direct control, rather than as a way to find more engagement.

As others have said self hosting has a maintenance and moderation overhead, but this can be lessened by running an instance together with other cities while still retaining most of the benefits of self hosting.

Seeing from the linked cross-post that this is about Port Alberni, and considering that http://portalberni.ca/ returns an empty reply while https://portalberni.ca/ lets me know I have been geoblocked because I'm outside of Canada and the US, I'd say you have an uphill battle before you though. These people made a website (probably paid for it, too), and then killed much of its use by geoblocking most of the world.

Good luck.

The Nazis weren't signatories to the Nuremberg charter, yet they were judged by it. So there is precedent for judging war crimes without pre-existing law.

There is a blue van in the right lane,

*car in front of a blue road sign

at 270 km/h (168 MPH), he’s going to be right behind it in a second.

The bollards on the right side of the road are at a distance of 50m from each other, by which we can estimate that the other car is at least 250 to 300 meters away. 270km/h equals 75m/s so they are about 4 seconds behind (if the other car was stationary).

Therefore the lane is not – in fact – free.

To answer this question it is much more important to know what is on the right lane next to or behind the car, which we do not see in this image anyway.

I think you are being naive.

Fair.

The LofN failed, the UN is now failing too.

That's why I'm looking for ideas to reform or replace it.

They by definition cannot solve problems. That said some related incentives have succeeded, such as the WHO.

That's kind of the crux here though, it can solve problems and it does. People are being fed by the UN every day. Yes, it's not good enough at solving the problems it is charged with solving. But that makes improving upon it the obvious course of action, does it not? What else is there except apathy?

Bodies like the LvN and UN are inherently going to fail to achieve peace because they rely on willing compliance with almost zero enforcement mechanisms.

Because having enforcement mechanisms slams face first into the principle of state sovereignty.

I agree on the state sovereignty part. But both the LvN and UN bettered the world within their limited means, while obviously more often failing than succeeding. So I don't agree on the failure part entirely. They may be inherently aspirational, but they tried and managed to improve conditions somewhat, exactly by being an (if ever so slight) impediment on state sovereignty that didn't exist before.

But yeah the general consensus seems to be that the UN is a failure, so I'm just looking for people who are thinking about what to do about that. Seems like the only people talking about it are the World Bank and Russia with its multipolar world order.

Yeah in a way. That particular keyword has a big conspiracy factor when you search for it though. :D

Local international institutions are of course an obvious avenue whether you aim for a world government or not, but I doubt they have velocity required for the problems we are facing, old and new.

Creating bigger and stronger governments will only lead to the protection of an elite that is way too irresponsible with their powers.

Well I clearly see the danger. The many against the few is a problem as old as society. And where there is power, there will be abuse. And every system we have, like separation of powers and checks and balances, is flawed. But the cold hard truth is that we have run out of time and I don't really see any other viable solutions. If somebody has one please let me know, that's why I made this post.

It’s genuinely very hard to find someone that says: “I don’t care about microplastics, “I have no issue with air pollutants causing cancer” and “I don’t care we are trashing the ocean”.

I know what you mean, most people would agree on this. But sadly it is very easy to find the people who would say so. Cui bono? Who is benefiting? So we need to regulate them. And then of course there are people too consumed with simply subsistence to care about any of this.

I don’t know if governments and corporations will solve the climate crisis, but goddamn I’ll do my part and help businesses and others do their part too.

On this we agree.

This is indeed interesting. That charter reads like a git diff on the current one. Exactly the stuff I was looking for, thanks.

World Bank ties though? Oof. People are going to call me a lizard person. /s

Puh, also kann ich leider nicht bestreiten das mir hier schon Volksverhetzung über den Bildschirm gekrochen ist, aber das war bisher noch auf so ziemlich jeder Social Media-Plattform auf der ich war der Fall... Und kam auch nicht unbedingt immer nur von lemmy.ml.

Bin jetzt auch kein Anwalt, aber soweit ich weiß wird das alles sowieso erst zum rechtlichen Problem wenn es gemeldet und nicht entfernt wird; Aber ich bezweifel ob das auf lemmy.ml überhaupt zutrifft, da es soweit ich weiß weder in Deutschland noch von Deutschen betrieben wird. Das könnte dann also überhaupt erst rechtlich fraglich werden wenn du etwas als User von hier meldest und die Admins von hier es nicht bannen. (Wobei feddit.org glaube ich in Österreich gehostet ist, und dann das dortige Recht gelten würde?)

Es ist jedenfalls technisch möglich das feddit.org bestimmte Benutzer/Kommentare bannt wenn die gemeldet werden, so das ich als lemmy.ml Benutzer die dann noch sehe aber du als feddit.org Benutzer nicht mehr. Das wäre im Sinne deiner Frage glaube ich eine bessere Lösung als hier gleich zu deföderieren.

NetzDG ist wahrscheinlich nicht anwendbar je nachdem wie du die Anzahl der Benutzer zählen möchtest.

FYI you have a typo in your last screenshot (This sign m[a]y not...):

I don't know if there is any single takeaway here, this story is just fucking ridiculous on every single level.

1. They bullshited themselves into a search warrant based on typical cannabis "investigation methods".
2. In a state where recreational cannabis use is legal.
3. Persisted in the search even after their main argument for it, high energy usage indicating a grow-op, fell away when it was clear it was indeed a medical facility.
4. Made the motherfucking "Gun flies to MRI" TV trope a certified reality. This is a thing that verifiably happened now.
5. Instead of getting help, used a sealed (!) emergency shutdown button...
6. ...which damaged the machine. And released thousands of dollars worth of helium gas.
7. Forgot their loaded magazine on the ground.

This can't be real. I'm fucking dying over here. Please let there be bodycam footage of the cop speaking in a high pitched voice after. (I know the helium was probably not released into the room, but one can hope I guess)

android auto

First I heard of this, but since it seems to be just some software that runs on the hardware of car manufacturers it seems rather unlikely. But very theoretically possible, if the car manufacturer was using default process scheduling in a CPU constrained machine and now switches to real-time scheduling in an update. But that was possible for years before this news, the code has just been mainlined to the default kernel now. If the car manufacturer cared about that they would probably have done it already with a patched kernel.