• 6 Posts
  • 103 Comments
Joined 5M ago
cake
Cake day: Aug 23, 2022

help-circle
rss

Whatever the company’s nationality, they will just fuck up the environment, local community (illness, children born with defects, …), and their subsistence when governement just lets those industries do whatever they want. Chinese business worldwide are no different than American/western; it is worth noticing that Chinese in some countries owns a great amount of industries, undermining the national businesses. This is just a modern form of colonization.

Both IMIP and IWIP are primarily owned by Chinese company Tsingshan Holding Group, which has been investing heavily in Indonesia’s nickel facilities since 2013. It has become the norm for Chinese companies seeking to get involved in the nickel-processing business in Indonesia to work with Tsingshan and its partners. Although the group reportedly plans to sell its assets in Indonesia, these will likely go to other Chinese companies. Tsingshan Holding Group did not respond to a request for comment for this story.

Ahmad Redi, an expert in natural resources and mining law at the University of Tarumanagara, believes that China’s dominance is a double-edged sword: On one side, it gives a boost to Indonesia’s state income and local economic growth, but on the other, it could mean that Indonesia’s nickel becomes a pawn in China’s larger industrialization agenda. “[This means] that maximum economic and added value potentials can’t be achieved by Indonesia,” he told Rest of World.

Additionally, Chinese investors are not known for having the highest concerns for environmental impact, Redi said. “The environmental damage and social conflict will cause Indonesia to suffer long-term losses,” he said.


That’s because you have enough information. Most watching do not; and they are not the ones who decide to fund it. If people could directly choose in a transparent way what to do with their taxes, do you think most would actively and authentically choose to fund it?


anybody watching and enjoying the WC have some serious problems with their ethical faculties and a severe lack of empathy.

Most have no idea. The people with issues are capitalists, government, soccer teams, …


No (I do not consume anything sports unless it is for learning purposes). I like playing soccer though


What are your favorite science video content creators?
Mine's - [PBS Space Time](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7_gcs09iThXybpVgjHZ_7g) - [Sabine Hossenfelder](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1yNl2E66ZzKApQdRuTQ4tw) - [Kurzgesagt](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCsXVk37bltHxD1rDPwtNM8Q)
fedilink



No. This leads to the commercialization/capitalization of accounts and “karma farming” in general. Increases numbers of bots, decreases content quality. It will become yet another Reddit. If Lemmy implements that I will be out of here.

Hope you devs can see the issues with it @nutomic@lemmy.ml and not become liberals. Stop the gamification!


No. I think people might just not have anything better going on in their lifes, do not know about any other topic, [include external factors], so that is most what they have to talk about. I dislike it as well. If they work for capitalists as most people do, talking about work for socializing with friends is worse yet (alienation and all that). Also, I think it is pitiful when people/workers identify with whatever the capitalist company/organization they work for (capitalist company which explores the workers).


Fixing issues, adding features, hard forking when I disagree on some fundamental aspects including both technical and social/governance, collaboration…

You question should be towards the free software community in general. Specifically to Linux, I like learning from its documentation and development process, compiling custom kernels, looking at the source…


An issue I see is that public instances are not properly announced/listed.

and for sourcehut, i could not find anything.


What are the signs? Gitea federation is being worked on. The Gitea fork is needed to address the Gitea for-profit issue.


We have Codeberg. So there is no need in recommending sourcehut if the priority is promoting democratic services.


He generating a job for himself is not what I criticize. I criticize promoting an undemocratic service for something so crucial that needs to be democratic which includes free service by default (otherwise you do not stand a chance against moving people out of GitHub and the like). I would never recommend to people in general a commercial and thus undemocratic service for key development (vcs).

And did it occur to you it is a “one guy” show probably because he wants it that way? That is prone to authoritarianism, and prone that sourcehut maintainer to make it a very profitable business just like GitLab and now Gitea unless founding a proper non-profit organization? A blog post about not being driven by profit is not enough; make it a proper non-profit registered organization.

In any case OP explicitly asked for a free service (which sourcehut in the future won’t be).


https://codeberg.org which is a non-profit organization. It is free of charge, so it is democratic enabling people to use its services. You can even join the foundation https://join.codeberg.org/

BUT it uses Gitea, which registered two for-profit companies in Hong Kong… Codeberg is soft forking it because the now Gitea shareholders / trademark owners made it clear they want to maximize profits.

If you care about promoting a democratic platform for everyone, do not use sourcehut. They will charge later on; their current free model enables both gathering users (potential clients) and making you a free tester/qa for them. I believe “financial aid” is undemocratic; free should be default. If anything, it should just require commercial, for-profit entities to pay; because then by default there is no processual need for “financial aid”. We should not trust any for-profit, commercial organization anyway for such important services/platforms (version control system hosting is crucial).

From the beta onwards, unpaid accounts will be limited to read-only access to their own projects. Affected users will be emailed at least 60 days in advance of the transition. Users who host their own instance of Sourcehut, on their own servers, will be unaffected by this. Additionally, financial aid will be provided to those who cannot pay; no one is going to be priced out.

https://sourcehut.org/alpha-details/


Nix and Guix are already reproducible and have immutable store; no need for images in that case, and they more flexible. I’d need to read the article more throughfully for the deployment argument



Almond without added sugar. But I’m going to try making it myself. I’m growing so much skeptical of anything industrially processed…


in the most free license there is (GNU AGPL version 3) as GNU/FSF defines, declining trademark usage is allowed as an additional term; it still is free software.

Notwithstanding any other provision of this License, for material you add to a covered work, you may (if authorized by the copyright holders of that material) supplement the terms of this License with terms:

e) Declining to grant rights under trademark law for use of some trade names, trademarks, or service marks; or

https://www.gnu.org/licenses/agpl-3.0.html


Indeed, that is what CPC calls historical nihilism. China is doing very well economically, so they are doing something right. Too bad on socio-economic inequality and illegal profits like tax evasion though; they seem to be doing something about it… https://www.msn.com/en-xl/money/other/china-e2-80-99s-xi-jinping-sends-e2-80-98warning-signal-e2-80-99-to-the-wealthy-as-he-opens-new-front-in-e2-80-98common-prosperity-e2-80-99-push/ar-AA139N4Z

Let’s see if it will not make capitalists get very angry.


But why not inform people about US involement then without further censorship? Latin American countries that have gone trough military dictatorships do not censor their crimes including torture and murder, and also publish information on US involvement on it.

So it seems you agree China/CPC censors historical events.


Innovative operating systems including Linux distributions, specially those which are usable?
In my experience, the most innovative distributions include [NixOS](https://nixos.org/) and [GNU Guix System](https://guix.gnu.org) (Nix influenced it): determinism/correctness, pure functional paradigm, declarative, atomic, departing from FHS for good, ... And they are pretty useful currently: [Nix has the most packages](https://repology.org/repositories/statistics/total), both are declarative so can easily reuse the configuration and apply in infrastructure as code, can rollback, can use for development (basically a way better alternative to Docker), can use in other distributions and Nix even on MacOS... Nix community being generally more practical, agile and flexible, while the GNU Guix community enforcing more correctness (building everything in their repositories from source including all transitive dependencies) and software freedom as GNU/FSF defines. Other distributions I could include are musl based ones, Clear Linux, Fedora SIlverblue, OpenSUSE MicroOS, and projects like sel4, Theseus OS, but I don't have much experience with them to describe them fairly. So please lets discourse about innovative distributions and operating systems, those which you have experienced, which you may be excited about.
fedilink

The Problems of Open Source
cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/113521 > cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/113520 > > > Some quotes > > > > > Twenty years ago, the phrase 'open source' had a definite meaning in computing which is quite different from the sense it has now... > > > > > Why is Free Software so Bad in Quality? > > > > > > Most free software is poor or unusable. This is heavily disguised because protagonists like to use the isolated points fallacy to sell the idea FOSS is great. > > > > > > ... > > > > > > ...if you're lucky enough to attract such a team you need to keep them together. And for that you need capital and that is exactly where FOSS falls down. This is the main reason why so much FOSS is of poor quality.1 > > > > > FOSS was Built Out of Corporation and Tax Money > > > > > > Open Office was derived from Star Office which was the product of StarDivision and Sun Microsystems. It was not put together by a hacker living in his mom’s spare bedroom... > > > > > > Emacs was supported financially by people working at the MIT AI Lab, which means that it was funded by Uncle Sam... > > > > > > Linux is...mostly a copy of Unix, despite howls to the contrary it is deeply unoriginal, being based on ideas going back to the time of the Vietnam War. These ideas were in turn evolved within Bell Labs by its creators who were also well-paid professionals. Linus Torvalds really copied an idea whose basis had been funded by university and corporation money and without that basis there would have been no Linux. > > > > > Free Open Source is not often Innovative > > > > > > ...lot of FOSS is poorly written reverse-engineered copies of existing commercial software. Innovation is hard; it requires time and brains. Reverse engineering is a powerful disincentive to innovation since anybody who does spend R&D capital in innovation, can have their ideas reverse engineered. > > > > > > ...
fedilink

The Problems of Open Source
cross-posted from: https://beehaw.org/post/113520 > Some quotes > > > Twenty years ago, the phrase 'open source' had a definite meaning in computing which is quite different from the sense it has now... > > > Why is Free Software so Bad in Quality? > > > > Most free software is poor or unusable. This is heavily disguised because protagonists like to use the isolated points fallacy to sell the idea FOSS is great. > > > > ... > > > > ...if you're lucky enough to attract such a team you need to keep them together. And for that you need capital and that is exactly where FOSS falls down. This is the main reason why so much FOSS is of poor quality.1 > > > FOSS was Built Out of Corporation and Tax Money > > > > Open Office was derived from Star Office which was the product of StarDivision and Sun Microsystems. It was not put together by a hacker living in his mom’s spare bedroom... > > > > Emacs was supported financially by people working at the MIT AI Lab, which means that it was funded by Uncle Sam... > > > > Linux is...mostly a copy of Unix, despite howls to the contrary it is deeply unoriginal, being based on ideas going back to the time of the Vietnam War. These ideas were in turn evolved within Bell Labs by its creators who were also well-paid professionals. Linus Torvalds really copied an idea whose basis had been funded by university and corporation money and without that basis there would have been no Linux. > > > Free Open Source is not often Innovative > > > > ...lot of FOSS is poorly written reverse-engineered copies of existing commercial software. Innovation is hard; it requires time and brains. Reverse engineering is a powerful disincentive to innovation since anybody who does spend R&D capital in innovation, can have their ideas reverse engineered. > > > > ...
fedilink