4·
3 months agoTheir GitHub has everything you’d want to know.
1. Monopolistic business practices to crush competition (Netscape, Java, web browsers, etc.).
- Microsoft was found guilty of maintaining an illegal monopoly and engaging in anti-competitive tactics against competitors like Netscape Navigator and Java in the 1990s antitrust case.
2. Illegal bundling of Internet Explorer with Windows to eliminate browser rivals.
- The U.S. government accused Microsoft of illegally bundling Internet Explorer with Windows to crush competition from other web browsers. Microsoft was found guilty of this tying arrangement.
3. Keeping useful Windows APIs secret from third-party developers to disadvantage competitors.
- Microsoft allegedly kept useful Windows APIs secret from third-party developers to give an advantage to their own applications, though this was not a central part of the antitrust case.
4. Embracing proprietary software and vendor lock-in tactics to prevent users from switching.
- Microsoft has been criticized for embracing proprietary software and vendor lock-in tactics that make it difficult for users to switch to alternatives, such as their failed attempts to establish OOXML as an open standard for Office documents.
5. “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” strategy against open source software.
- Microsoft has been accused of using the “Embrace, Extend, Extinguish” strategy against open source software to undermine adoption of open standards. This is also shown in the leaked Halloween documents.
6. Privacy violations through excessive data collection, user tracking, and sharing data with third parties.
- Microsoft has faced scrutiny over privacy issues, such as the NSA surveillance scandal and their handling of user data with Windows 10.
7. Complicity in enabling government surveillance and spying on user data (PRISM scandal).
- The PRISM surveillance scandal revealed Microsoft’s complicity in enabling government spying on user data.
8. Deliberately making hardware/software incompatible with open source alternatives.
- Microsoft has been accused of deliberately making hardware and software incompatible with open source alternatives through restrictive licensing requirements.
9. Anti-competitive acquisitions to eliminate rivals or control key technologies (GitHub, LinkedIn, etc.).
- Microsoft has acquired many companies over the years, sometimes in an effort to eliminate competition or gain control over key technologies and platforms.
10. Unethical contracts providing military technology like HoloLens for warfare applications.
- Microsoft’s $480 million contract to provide HoloLens augmented reality tech for the military drew protests from employees and criticism over aiding warfare.
11. Failing to address workplace issues like sexual harassment at acquired companies.
- Microsoft’s failed acquisition of gaming company Activision Blizzard raised concerns about ignoring workplace issues like sexual harassment at the acquired company.
12. Forced automatic Windows updates that override user control and cause system issues.
- Microsoft has faced backlash for forcing automatic updates on Windows users, including major updates that have caused issues like deleted files and crashed systems. Users have little control over when updates install.
13. Maintaining monopolistic dominance in productivity software and operating systems.
- Microsoft has maintained its dominance in areas like productivity software (Office) and operating systems (Windows), making it difficult for competitors to gain market share. This monopolistic position allows them to exert control over the industry.
14. Vague and toothless AI ethics principles while pursuing lucrative military AI contracts.
- Microsoft’s AI ethics principles have been criticized as vague and toothless in light of their pursuit of lucrative military AI contracts.
15. Continued excessive privacy violations and treating users as products with Windows.
- Windows 10 has been criticized for excessive data collection and lack of user privacy controls, essentially treating users as products to be monetized.
16. Restrictive proprietary licensing that stifles open source adoption.
- Microsoft’s proprietary software licensing makes it difficult for open source alternatives to be adopted widely, as they have a history of undermining open source software and interoperability with Windows.
This isn’t even anywhere near everything.
That’s a weird way of saying :
I’mma pull bullshit out of my ass with no evidence.
why would you care about a far away government collecting intelligence about you over the one that can (and will) actually hurt you?
Both of you are dangerous in truth. We don’t trust anyone. (ಠ_ಠ)>⌐■-■ Why do you think we use FOSS?
You really just compared “African leader” to “a monkey”. I can’t, I can’t believe it. The irony, the sheer irony, it’s delicious, so very delicious, keep feeding me more of this shit.
You’re completely miss understanding the entire thing. You’re dear lead is being compared to an iconic, childhood beloved, Disney, cartoon bear 🐻, and you think it’s racist? How foolish.
You’re the only one “comparing Chinese people to yellow animals” in truth. Your Irony is delicious to me.
False. “Chinese people” aren’t being compared to “yellow animals”. The only thing happening here is your dear leader looking like a cartoon Bear 🐻.
Removed by mod
123·5 months agoHell yeah!! So many needed fixes that have been bugging me for a while are finally fixed!!
Why should we have the same standard for two fundamentally different languages with distinct design philosophies and features?
Even if the C coding standard was used, it fundamentally will not make Rust more legible to C-only kernel devs. Imposing the C coding standard on Rust would be fundamentally counterproductive, as it would undermine Rust’s safety and productivity features. Rust’s coding guidelines align with its design principles, promoting idiomatic Rust code that leverages language features like ownership, borrowing, and lifetimes.
This ensures that Rust code in the kernel is safe, concurrent, and maintainable, while adhering to the language’s best practices. While the C coding standard served its purpose well for the procedural C language, it is ill-suited for a modern language like Rust, which has different priorities and language constructs. Having separate coding standards allows each language to shine in its respective domain within the kernel, leveraging their strengths while adhering to their respective design philosophies. Having separate coding standards for C and Rust within the kernel codebase is the sensible approach.
3·5 months agoIf it’s a native app then it’s fine, else if it’s just a chromium skin then that bullshit can fuck off.
In any case, it’s the temporary file directory so it should be fine to delete them manually.
Just make sure that podman isn’t running while you’re deleting them, assuming it is podman.
This error is caused by a compatibility issue between Wine’s RandR (X11 display extension) implementation and the NVIDIA proprietary drivers.
a. Install winetricks and run
winetricks orm=backbuffer glsl=disableThis will configure Wine to use a different rendering method that is compatible with the NVIDIA drivers.&/Or
b. Use a tool like Q4Wine to configure the Wine prefix and set the “UseRandR” option to “N” This will disable Wine’s use of the RandR extension and use a fallback method instead.
That should fix it.
Look, even if Biden wanted to, he can’t just waltz in and set up a full-blown social credit system like they have in China. The infrastructure and technology for that kind of comprehensive, government-controlled system just isn’t there (yet). If we can pass the right bills to block that kind of technology from being used for this purpose in the first place, then it really won’t matter what other laws he tries to push through.
And you know, even in places that seem to be “credit-only,” you can often still get by without a credit history, In many cases, you can actually talk the private owner or landlord into giving you access based on other factors, like your income, rental history, or whatever else they’re willing to consider. Sure, it might be a bit more of a hassle, and the landlord or business might give you a harder time. But the practical restrictions you face are nothing compared to what you’d see in an actual government-run social credit system. In those cases, you’d be completely shut out from entire aspects of life based on your social credit score - no wiggle room at all.
The credit card and private sector restrictions are honestly pretty minor compared to that level of government control. When it comes to renting, for example, if a landlord decides not to rent to you because you lack credit history, that’s really just their own personal decision as the property owner. The government isn’t mandating that. And the whole credit card system itself is run by private companies, not the government. These are financial tools that businesses have created, not some government scheme to monitor and restrict people’s lives.
The key distinction is that a true social credit system, like what they have in China, is directly controlled by the government. They’re the ones setting the baseline standards and dictating who can access certain things based on this overarching social credit score they’ve assigned to you. It’s not just about your personal finances or what private companies decide - the government is the one drawing those lines and controlling your access to basic services and opportunities.
In that kind of system, even if a landlord was willing to rent to you, they might not be able to because you don’t meet the government’s required social credit threshold for that particular region.
They’re essentially “redlining” people based on this government-run social credit system, in a way that goes far beyond anything we have with private credit cards and loans.
That level of comprehensive state control is a whole other beast compared to the more limited, private-sector driven credit systems we have.A major component that makes China’s entire social credit system work is they’re huge surveillance systems of high tech & low tech spy mechanisms like intrusive cameras, facial recognition software, automatic law enforcement systems, AI integration, web surveillance, “great firewall of China” and much more.
So while I agree Biden is pushing some concerning legislation on things like hate speech and nonprofits, that’s a separate issue from actually implementing a social credit system. Our focus should be on preventing that kind of technology and infrastructure from taking root in the first place. That’s where I think our efforts need to be directed.
What’s the WINE error message you get with the proprietary driver?
That really doesn’t mean much.