Knowing how important the site is to the fandom, I’d be surprised if anyone lets it go under.
That being said, as a precaution, a PixelFed instance attached to pawb.fun and pawb.social might be nice to have.
Just a serval who gets into all sorts of furry shenanigans.
Knowing how important the site is to the fandom, I’d be surprised if anyone lets it go under.
That being said, as a precaution, a PixelFed instance attached to pawb.fun and pawb.social might be nice to have.
The one way a company can avoid that is to not go publicly traded in the first place. Problem is there’s a huge a mount of incentive to go publicly traded - specifically, it’s a huge boost to cash-on-hand, which can be crucial for expanding a business - so most corporations will basically do so without batting an eyelash at it. It’s a lot slower to build a company solely from net profits and private investors. But the cost of faster growth is a loss of control of the company.
From a technological point, yes. That being said, there are some complications. The US runs double-stacked intermodal freight so clearance is a concern, first of all. It’s doable, in fact India has many electrified lines that allow for double-stacked intermodal freight, but it does add a little to the cost and effort. The second issue is, unfortunately, cost, but not because it’s outright “too expensive”. Rather, it would eat too much into the short-term quarterlies of the various publicly traded rail companies that own a vast majority of the US’s rail lines during the installation. And as publicly traded companies, even if one of the major rail companies wanted to spend the money to electrify, they would get sued by their shareholders for doing so because there’s no immediate return on profits. And the final issue? NIMBYs already hate rail as-is, they’d hate the overhead lines even more.
So, yeah, a lot of challenges to electrification unique to the US, almost all of them political in nature. It would be really nice to put in electrified rail again (late PRR and New Haven were almost fully electrified but most of that was ripped out after the Penn Central merger. Seriously, everyone likes to rag on New Haven for screwing that up but honestly the evidence all points to the New York Central’s management team being the real culprits).
Oh good. An AI search bot replaces… an AI search bot. 😒
Well, at least SearchGPT is open source. And the fact that it’s operated by a nonprofit org rather than a big corporate entity could be the kicker here, there’s no incentive to favor business partners or advertising clients. So I guess we might actually see an improvement here.
They’re tightly controlled corporate environments, but the people controlling them aren’t always smart.
Could be something as simple as computers just being screwy sometimes. Or something as unlikely but still precedented as a bit-flip caused by an excited electron causing something important to actually be affected.
But what about forcing the computer to do something via bootable ASM?
It’s always big data, isn’t it?
A motion sensor would get tripped by anything that passes by, but even so, a basic image processing algorithm designed just to detect whether that thing is a human or not would be more than sufficient, there’s no need to identify specific people by face.
To be fair, if Metaverse did integrate something like this they would definitely record telemetry data “for development purposes”.
He who keeps the old akindle, and adds new knowledge, is fit to be a teacher an inventor.
They hacked a nuclear lab to ask for what would be genetics research… facepalm
Modern times are really “people should get off of X platform but don’t because people don’t want to move”.
More like “people should get off of X platform but don’t because people they regularly interact with don’t want to move, and because herd mentality”
It’s the same reason why people tolerate YouTube’s bullshit. The audience won’t switch to a platform without content, and the content creators won’t switch to a platform without an audience.
I’m not saying it wouldn’t be an issue, ideally this kind of stuff should be banned whether there’s a workaround or not, because the average user is still going to have to deal with. My point is that, well, if you build a 10 foot wall, someone’s going to make a 12 foot ladder to get over it.
The system relies on an encryption key stored on the device, right? That’s actually a really stupid idea if you don’t want people breaking that encryption. Someone’s eventually going to figure out how to access that. Even the Nintendo Switch, previously notorious for being a completely airtight system, has been jailbroken.
So, in other words, I’ve been halucinating the fact that these services work perfectly fine on my Omnirom-patched OnePlus 7 Pro?
Except you’re not forced to use the Play store if you’re using a non-Google fork of Android. So unless they’re locking out the entire OS if it doesn’t authenticate (which, if they do, that runs afoul of interoperability protections), you can still install APKs directly.
Also, if it’s at the silicon level, that’s not even in the OS, that’s in the device and Google is going to have to bet on device manufacturers (particularly Samsung, due to their market share) playing along. If Samsung in particular decides that Google is going too far (and they could, they have their own reputation to worry about and they’re also going to want to have control over the devices they make - control that Google could potentially deny them as they continue to tighten their grip), that’s game over. Google could try to push their own hardware but Samsung has too much market dominance in the mobile device hardware sector for Google to challenge like that.
The solution is the same, though. Chances are non-Google Android forks aren’t going to implement this, just like how Chromium-based browsers that aren’t Chrome (or Edge) ended up implementing solutions for the depreciation of webRequest in Chromium’s implementation of MV3. So if Google does do this, just unlock your device’s bootloader and flash Omnirom or another Android fork onto it.
It’s worse than that. Companies are legally required to follow shareholder interests. That’s not that big of an issue with unlisted companies since their shareholders are most likely directly involved with the company or at least share a similar vision to those that are, but any publicly traded company is going to be solely focused on “line go up lol” whether they want to or not.