• 5 Posts
  • 176 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 8th, 2023

help-circle
  • I think you can keep doing the SMB shares and use an overlay filesystem on top of those to basically stack them on top of each other, so that server1/dir1/file1.txt and server2/dir1/file2.txt and server3/dir1/file3.txt all show up in the same folder. I’m not sure how happy that is when one of the servers just isn’t there though.

    Other than that you probably need some kind of fancy FUSE application to fake a filesystem that works the way you want. Maybe some kind of FUES-over-Git-Annex system exists that could do it already?

    I wouldn’t really recommend IPFS for this. It’s tough to get it to actually fetch the blocks promptly for files unless you manually convince it to connect to the machine that has them. It doesn’t really solve the shared-drive problem as far as I know (you’d have like several IPNS paths to juggle for the different libraries, and you’d have to have a way to update them when new files were added). Also it won’t do any encryption or privacy: anyone who has seen the same file that you have, and has the IPFS hash of it, will be able to convince you to distribute the file to them (whether you have a license to do so or not).



  • Because to put a build in F-Droid you need to write a build script to build the whole app from source on F-Droid’s VMs. You can’t, for example, fetch binary dependencies from Maven. You need to build them from source as part of your build process.

    Android Firefox fetches a bunch of stuff from Maven as part of its build, some of which is proprietary libraries from Google to e.g. talk to Google Play Services or to Google’s trusted-hardware stuff, and some of which is the whole Gecko C++ source tree. Mozilla doesn’t want to pay their people to maintain two separate build systems for Firefox, one of which has to jump through a bunch of hoops.








  • And it doesn’t cause other problems like outsmarting the brain systems that are supposed to be attaching your intelligence to the interests of your body? Or the people inconveniently stopping you from snorting cocaine constantly until you die? And there’s no level of intelligence you reach where you note that higher levels are unlikely to be any more use to you in achieving your actual goals, versus spending that button-pushing time on other tasks? And all this intelligence is free and doesn’t require any energy input to run in your head? And at some level you become intelligent enough to impart these abilities to your descendants or to just never die? And you reach a level of intelligence where you can fight off the CIA before you reach a level of intelligence where you interest the CIA?

    People don’t generally reason about things like “intelligence” as an abstract value from zero to infinity, because we don’t encounter such things very often. What we do encounter is people trying to scam us. If you present someone with something that appears to be a 100% obvious perfect move with absolutely no drawbacks whatsoever, they mostly correctly conclude that they just aren’t smart enough to understand the catch.




  • too expensive for there to be competition

    How does that work, exactly? For something like a railroad or a power grid, you get a natural monopoly because you need a system to connect everyone to everyone else for it to really work, and you need to pay to build out the connection to each person.

    For video streaming, you need to pay for servers to transcode, store, and serve the video. Which is expensive, sure. But then each user comes in over the Internet; you aren’t paying to connect directly to their house, and you aren’t putting a CDN node in every town when the town has 5 users who can just talk to the central deployment.

    If you want to run ads, you find some network that places video ads, and you get the ads from them and you run them. Maybe they don’t pay enough and the service is not profitable, but what would make that change if the service were bigger?

    Where are the huge, unassailable costs? Where is the revenue you can’t get unless you are the absolute biggest?





  • I think it’s it’s own thing.

    The danger of advertising is not that it is able to brainwash you into changing your opinions. The danger is that repeated exposure to inauthentic stories changes your expectations, and plants paying advertisers in your memory.

    This in turn allows your behavior to be controlled, especially in aggregate. You will remember company X sells a thing you want and go buy it, or you will think other people think company Y is environmentally friendly so you will pick them for your vegan barbecue party, or you will have heard of company Z and not automatically skip over their offering in a store. But since it all operates by tampering with your heuristics instead of trying to bowl over your adopted, explicit opinions, it doesn’t trigger any of your protective responses.

    And that’s why you should never view an advertisement.