Re: edit - you should actually read the article on what tone policing is in their conception and what is harmful about it, not all being called out for dickish replyguy behavior is tone policing. Frustration and aggression can be warranted, and is fine to express, but when all you’re doing is arguing with no cogent point (see: yelling into the void) and misinterpreting what someone is saying to the point of absurdity, aggression is being actively harmful to the discussion. That’s just being an ass for catharsis.

And again, the point was to point out that the person you’re responding to did not say what you claimed they did, and that the addition about labour was helpful. You can be as frustrated and aggressive as you want about that, but this whole discussion could’ve been in agreement, you both appear to agree with each other on the meat of the politics.

Huh?

I mean… you are literally instead of discussing the politics of the UK, actively choosing to be antagonistic.

And antagonistic in a way that I have literally no idea what you’re even trying to say, beyond wildly thrashing into the void.

Sounds like they were just hoping things would at least improve, which means not get actively worse nor remain strictly the same, but does not mean things become absolutely good and fixed. You’re the one putting “fundamental changes to how things are run” as their claim.

I found their comment quite helpful, and the content of the addition that labour may not do much better was also useful and fit in the framework they gave.

I don’t think the aggression was warranted or helpful, and only served to stagnate the discussion.

Because why solve trivial coding problem when experimental bad technology that won’t even work after a many fold increase in implementation time do trick?

As we all know, ai are the best and only solution to complex tasks such as rudimentary file management.

I mean I disagree about not sympathizing with folks somewhat trapped in a hostile software ecosystem, but surely “stand by your beliefs” is not unheard of.

At this point I can only determine you are arguing for the sake of arguing.

Much of what you said is very wrong but it’s not worth arguing about.

Or you know, reducing thermal load by using broadly more efficient capacitors allowing you to shove more current in the car. Or by meeting grid scale requirements for car charging by smoothing out the grid impact of a bunch of charging at once. Or any number of benefits.

Ultimately this certainly benefits car charging. It benefits all electronics. No you won’t be getting two second car charges with this.

Almost every electrical system on the planet uses capacitors. Especially high power systems. Of which evs are.

“No real point in mixing capacitors in with a large battery” ?? That’s done literally all the time for both filtering and for intermittent high power output. Like when I say almost every electrical system uses caps, I mean almost every electrical system.

More of an actual comment, good. More efficient capacitors in both speed and heat certainly helps in charging devices of all sizes. Of course it wouldn’t be charging large batteries in seconds, but that doesn’t mean no improvement.

Why do you feel that the researchers are wrong about their physics research?

Why would librewolf specifically advise that you minimize your extensions to decrease client uniqueness if it had no effect on client uniqueness? Someone’s misinformed, and I don’t think its librewolf.

With about a half an hour of reading documentation it became very clear a couple versions ago what work benches were, which were useful to me, and how to use them. That’s maybe longer than going from inventor to solidworks or visa versa, but hardly that bad. For a beginner it will be taking a long time anyway and there will be essentially no difference, except that you’ll learn a much more robust understanding of how parametric modeling works.

Freecad has improved considerably in the last year, to a point where I’ve gone from saying I will wait to use it, to recommending it. It may actually have been designed for humans now.

they’d all have been working somewhere else

… Somewhere else possibly innovating even moreso than where they are…

I’d argue corporations should strive to represent their employees. Corporations don’t deserve to maintain anything, they aren’t people and have no ethical status either.

Nonetheless you’re working double time to make sure the use of ‘reasonable’ with all its connotations is seen as acceptable here. Making sure everyone knows that you think this is normative.

We will not reach a common ground.

Lets be clear, there’s a difference between “reasonable” and “expected behavior” and it’s an important one.

Social engineering is to gain access circumventing downcode, not really “get a head start”…

Most attacks are entirely social engineering. You’re not breaking into secure databases by pulling ridiculous zero day backdoors when it’s much easier to convince an intern to download a file or give you access directly. These super involved attacks are state actors, and no amount of trying to hide what Linux version is being modified will do anything for you there.

State actors of course also use social engineering

Ultimately the point is hacking really doesn’t involve the kind of subterfuge you’re describing here in a way where " what Linux is it " matters at all. I mean, windows is used for secure systems across the world, it’s hardly secretive.

I don’t think it really matters whether a potential adversary has a ‘head start’ all that much, security through obscurity doesn’t work super well when it’s going to be deployed to thousands of easily accessible devices anyway. It’d only just be a defense in depth, but even then meh. But it’s neither here nor there, they’ll do it whatever way they feel is best.

It won’t be a security risk once it’s in use, IT across Germany will know within days of deployment. It will almost definitely be a modified version of some probably well known Linux.

I mean anything anyone does on the internet is tech given they do it on the internet.

Musk is largely just being a shitty ceo doing ceo things, kinda notably for cultural reasons, sure, but musk news probably better serves as more business news than tech.