cypherpunks

joined 3 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 hours ago

as of March 19, yes it should be

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago)

from Change Agent: Gene Sharp’s Neoliberal Nonviolence :

Sharp’s ideas about nonviolent action are generally billed as apolitical, post-ideological, common sense activist strategy and tactics. But they actually flowed from a clear worldview. Sharp saw “centralized government” as the key vector of violence in the modern world. He supported “decentralizing” state functions to “independent,” “non-State” institutions—a prescription that sounds a lot like privatization. Importantly, he argued nonviolent action itself was the most strategic way to bring about this state transformation.

With the rise of the Reagan-era foreign policy of communist “rollback,” Sharp began promoting “strategic nonviolence” internationally through his Albert Einstein Institution (AEI). Sharp co-founded AEI with his former student Peter Ackerman, who was simultaneously right hand man to the notorious corporate raiding “junk bond king” Michael Milken. Later, Ackerman was a Cato Institute board member and advocate of disemboweling social security. AEI spent the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s training activists, policymakers, and defense leaders around the world in Sharp’s nonviolent methods, supporting numerous “color revolutions”—again and again in state socialist countries whose administrations were attempting to oppose the privatization, austerity policies, and deregulation being pushed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank, and U.S. Treasury-led “Washington Consensus.” Sharp’s “people-powered” nonviolent “ju-jitsu” would prove surprisingly effective, distinguishing itself as a powerful weapons system in the U.S. regime change arsenal. While AEI was an independent non-profit, it had significant connections to the U.S. defense and intelligence community. One prominent AEI consultant was Colonel Robert Helvey, former dean of the National Defense Intelligence College. AEI’s regular funders included U.S. government pass-throughs like the U.S. Institute for Peace, the International Republican Institute, and the National Endowment for Democracy.

Kombucha Girl meme format, top text "libertarians be like", disgusted face next to "tyranny.gov", reconsidering face next to "tyranny.com"

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

cross-post of my comment elsewhere:

I immediately knew this was going to be from Microsoft users, and yeah... of course, it is.

Binaries distributed under this EULA do not meet the free software definition or open source definition.

However, unlike most attempts to dilute the concept of open source, since the EULA is explicitly scoped to binaries and says it is meant to be applied to projects with source code that is released under an OSI-approved license, I think the source code of projects using this do still meet the open source definition (as long as the code is actually under such a license). Anyone/everyone should still be free to fork any project using this, and to distribute free binaries which are not under this EULA.

This EULA obviously cannot be applied to projects using a copyleft license, unless all contributors to it have dual-licensed their contributions to allow (at least) the entity that is distributing non-free binaries under this EULA to do so.

I think it is extremely short-sighted to tell non-paying "consumers" of an open source project that their bug reports are not welcome. People who pay for support obviously get to heavily influence which bugs get priority, but to tell non-paying users that they shouldn't even report bugs is implicitly communicating that 2nd and 3rd party collaboration on fixing bugs is not expected or desired.

A lot of Microsoft-oriented developers still don't understand the free software movement, and have been trying to twist it into something they can comprehend since it started four decades ago. This is the latest iteration of that; at least this time they aren't suggesting that people license their source code under non-free licenses.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Because Netanyahu doesn’t want to testify at his corruption trial

Yes, that was one reason...

and because the United States has not stopped giving them weapons to carry out this war, regardless of what they did and or who the US president was

and that is another.

But, this article buries the lede about what was probably the most compelling reason for Benjamin Netanyahu in making his decision to murder hundreds of people yesterday and today:

Netanyahu has a deadline: his government must pass a national budget in two weeks, or face the prospect of his government collapsing, triggering new elections.

Returning to war paved the way for Netanyahu to bring his far-right ally Itamar Ben Gvir back inside the coalition and beef up his governing majority. Ben Gvir had quit because of the January ceasefire with Hamas, and returned Tuesday with the resumption of the war.

[...]

The strikes could last at least another two weeks until Israel passes its national budget, giving Netanyahu a stronger position in power and more flexibility to resume a ceasefire, analysts say.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

1525 the economic powers of the world were India and china https://www.businessinsider.com/mckinsey-worlds-economic-center-of-gravity-2012-6

that is a fascinating map; i noticed that despite making projections about 2025 the date of that post is actually 2012; Business Insider attributes it to McKinsey, but via ZeroHedge (who charges for access to their archives).

I wanted more context so I spent a few minutes searching; in case anyone else is curious it comes from a report called "Urban world: Cities and the rise of the consuming class" by McKinsey Global Institute.

Here is their summary of it, and here is the 92 page PDF of the full report.

here is MGI's 'economic center of gravity' methodologyThe center of gravity analysis is based on country-level historical estimates from Angus Maddison for the period AD 1 until 2007, and country-level growth rates from Cityscope 2.0 until 2025. We then allocated each country’s GDP value to the approximate center of landmass of the respective country. The same center of each country was used throughout the entire time frame. To calculate the global center of gravity, landmass radian coordinates were transformed into Cartesian coordinates with a tool from the UK Ordnance Survey that uses ED50/ UTM data and projection (see www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/gps). We then transformed these coordinates into respective momentums and averaged these to a true economic center of gravity for each year, located within the sphere of the earth. To illustrate the shift of gravity, we lengthened the vectors from the center of the earth to the center of gravity so that they lie on the earth’s surface. Although the concept of “surfacing” might create problems for interpreting data, both the resulting direction and the magnitude of the surfaced shifts were directionally consistent with the internal shifts, too. The four periods with the fastest shift, 2000–10, 1940–50, and 2010–25, maintain the same rank order, while the 1500–1820 period ranks 11th on surface but eighth on the “true” center of gravity.

here is what they say about ~500 years agoUntil 1500, Asia was the center of gravity of the world economy, accounting for roughly two-thirds of global GDP. But in the 18th and 19th centuries, urbanization and industrialization vaulted Europe and the United States to prominence. We are now observing a decisive shift in the balance back toward Asia—at a speed and on a scale never before witnessed. China’s economic transformation resulting from urbanization and industrialization is happening at 100 times the scale of the first country in the world to urbanize—the United Kingdom—and at ten times the speed (Exhibit E2).

but wait, where did they get that GDP data from?They actually cite Angus Maddison's Monitoring the World Economy 1820–1992 which doesn't sound like something that goes to AD 1. It looks like Maddison also published The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective (currently only a limited preview on archive.org) in 2001, which this reproduces Appendix B of - which seems like probably their source:

World GDP, 20 Countries and Regional Totals, 1-2001 AD

screenshot of "Table 8b. World GDP, 20 Countries and Regional Totals, 1-2001 AD" from "HS–8: The World Economy, 1–2001 AD"

I'm not sure how Geary–Khamis dollars ("a hypothetical unit of currency that has the same purchasing power parity that the U.S. dollar had in the United States at a given point in time") are supposed to work for time periods prior to the existence of the United States, but i think I've spent enough time on this rabbit hole for now :)

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago

obligatory FSN linksscreenshot of SGI's FSN

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 days ago (3 children)

if you've never used ed(1) technically it's illegal for you to say "it's a UNIX system, i know this"

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

They had a Republican governor from 2003 to 2011.

Clinton got 46.4% there in 2016, only a 1.5% lead over Trump.

Their House of Representatives is currently split 50/50 (with Republican leadership due to this), and the DFL has a one-seat majority in the Senate.

I wouldn't call it "incredibly blue", and certainly not "one of the bluest".

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Like one of the bluest.

False. It's almost a swing state.screenshot of wikipedia's "2024 United States presidential election in Minnesota" infobox, showing most of the counties in red and vote totals of 50.92% for Harris and 46.68% for Trump screenshot of Minnesota Senate infobox showing 67 seats, 34 Democratic–Farmer–Labor and 33 Republican

In fact, if you sort the table here you can see that of the states Harris/Walz won there was only one (New Hampshire) where they got a lower percentage of the vote than in Minnesota.

However with the Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party having a majority (by a single seat) in the Senate, this bill will obviously not pass, and if it did, obviously the governor (Tim Walz) would not sign it.

This is just trolling by some deeply unserious politicians.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

yep. (see my other comment in this thread)

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

The three currently-maintained engines which (at their feature intersection) effectively define what "the web" is today are Mozilla's Gecko, Apple's WebKit, and Google's Blink.

The latter two are both descended from KHTML, which came from the Konquerer browser which was first released as part of KDE 2.0 in 2000, and thus both are LGPL licensed.

After having their own proprietary engine for over two decades, Microsoft stopped developing it and switched to Google's fork of Apple's fork of KDE's free software web engine.

Probably Windows will replace its kernel with Linux eventually too, for better or worse :)

How else are Chrome, Edge, Brave, Arc, Vivaldi and co getting away with building proprietary layers on top of a copyleft dependency?

They're allowed to because the LGPL (unlike the normal GPL) is a weak copyleft license.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (5 children)

BSD tells me the team probably wants Ladybird to become not just a standalone browser but also a new competing base for others to build a browser on top of

skeletor facts until-we-meet-again meme format, saying that every major web browser uses a rendering engine with a copyleft license

view more: next ›