Zoe @ekg@librem.one

@tychotithonus I am more worried that people lacking the skill will just give up. If people with marginal understanding believes that quantum computers will make the mitigation they now how to do irelevant; they might be demotivated to do what they can.

Of course that is an argument for education, but everyone can't be an expert.

@tychotithonus I think the iimportant difference of opinion is whatever or not quantum computers will ever be practical.

@shrew @bri_seven

Blitzscaling(1) is definitely a factor, but it's hardly a religion. I would describe it as regulatory arbitrage(2).

(1) https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0007681319301478?via%3Dih

(2) https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/faculty_scholarship/2567/

@bri_seven

The closest I can think of hand is rokos basilisk

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roko%27s_basilisk

@ipg doesn't it unwrap the video as well?

@apophis @tisanae just looked it up my self. Would be very confused if I had been in that situation.

@tisanae @apophis nothing to be sorry about, unfortunately most distros aren't on the latest kernel. It's definitely possible that OP is running a kernel before support was merged.

@tisanae @apophis just pulled up menuconfig, not a word about it being experimental. Linux 6.15.4

@apophis yes, but it's Linux, you better check with who built your kernel.

@praustrian@mastodon.social @thejapantimes You do realise we need steal to build warships?

@dlakelan I fully understand that.

The reason I gave up on arguing against the accumulation of wealth is because I came to understand that is a losing battle, and my energy is spent better elsewhere.

That's why I wrote they generally speaking have popular support. I am not going to argue against something that doesn't directly do harm.

That a person sit on meme coins that according to thin markets is worth a billion dollars, is completely worthless to argue against.

@dlakelan billionaires don't always have their wealth in something that can be given away, it's actually extremely rare for people to have their wealth mostly in commodities.

Most Monarchs are popular, that is they have the support of the people. They couldn't surrender their role even if they wanted to.

The Swedish royal family was installed by one of the French republics. He spoke only French and he is most well known for a tattoo, and refusing to pay war debts, to France.

@dlakelan given that people don't have similar goals and desire, why are you against billionaires or Monarchs?

The way I see it is that we have all different lot in life by accident of birth. No one should be punished or belittle because of whom they are, or what life they where born into.

If someone is born into a dynasty, as far as I am concerned it's our job to not punish them for that. The same way we shouldn't punish someone for being poor.

@dlakelan fairness have nothing to do with equal.

What is fair is the universal application of human rights.

What's fair is that everyone has access to the necessities of a decent life with dignity.

That access in no way needs to be equal, or even easy.

I have nothing against billionaires, or Monarchs.

What I am against is children starving, or people being forcefully removed from their home.

@dlakelan what you are describing is called rule of law.

It's a slow deliberate process that is constantly undermine by people that either don't understand it, or is exploited by those that would benefit from its failure.

@dlakelan no, it's not fair to the person sleeping under a bridge.

With every law a constitutional test should be applied to see if it is in agreement with the constitution, where basic rights to dignity is established.

Many of our rights tie back to the Magna Carta, many others come from common law.

@dlakelan you can call anything a law, it doesn't make it so.

I don't know the background of the quote, but I suspect they criticised a specific application of law as unfair. Which would make it a bad law.