This isn’t an ideological boycott, this is stuff I avoid bc it’s not great.
ATT (I get better cell service in a subway than I do in my house and I’m on it because my MVNO switched from T-Mobile to att) HP (worlds shittiest hinges) Comcast, Spectrum (parents have comcast, it sucks. My friends have Spectrum, it also sucks)
Why SpaceX? I hate Musk and do not support any of his other... anythings. However, rocket go zoom then land without boom is fun to watch. I am genuinely curious why SpaceX is bad.
I completely agree about everything else you mentioned.
Space. They’re killing radio astronomy, endangering optical astronomy and threatening everything else in orbit, from telecoms, to earth observation, to the ISS.
They’re also spreading rare earth metal everywhere when the satellites burn up and wasting a lot of energy to get them up there when we’re facing an energy crisis.
Falcon 9 makes use of kerosene, which puts black soot into the atmosphere (if they used solely liquid oxygen or liquid hydrogen the only thing left would be water vapour)
Serious damage at a Texas base (caused craters and debris to scatter around remote cameras)
An explosion on the launch pad during a test caused damage
Boca Chica…
Massive amounts of dust, which contain toxic shit
Destroyed the launchpad (scattering large chunks of concrete into delicate marine and coastal sanctuaries nearby)
Because Musk is a vocal ass and so many on Lemmy can’t distinguish the good some of his companies do from the jerkoff owner.
Nestle does evil and is run by evil. Tesla is pushing the automobile industry in the direction it needs to go, but it is majority owned by evil. It’s not as simple as a keyboard activist response, so I’m looking forward to the downvotes as I point this out again.
Good luck ever trying to defend Tesla and Space X on Lemmy.
Why would you want to defend those companies? Literally what the fuck good do you think they’re doing? How does it outweigh the huge government subsidies they take away from non-garbage companies that could do the same things but without being as awful?
I asked a fucking question and the only answer I got was "musk bad." I posted very clear qualifiers in the original comment and every other comment stating exactly that but somehow a whole bunch of y'all completely ignore that, repeatedly. It's a critical bit of context that completely negates any defenses of any thing.
Then you go on to mention Tesla which was not mentioned in the comment you replied to. So it's obvious you're reading what's written throughout the comments. It also makes obvious that you're only picking out the parts you want. I never, not once, in any way defended Tesla.
I DON'T SUPPORT MUSK. I DID NOT DEFEND SPACEX OR TESLA. How else can I make it clear? What the fuck is going on with people missing the key bit of context?
I asked a question about SpaceX and someone else mentions Tesla. Somehow a bunch of you fuckers read it as I'm defending both SpaceX and Tesla.
For example they “decorated” our night sky with thousands of their satellites. Never asked permission. Astronomers around the globe are pissed because their work & results gets worse. Other people who own satellites are pissed because they don’t behave up there.
Except the carbon footprint of Starlink is estimated to be 30x greater than terrestrial alternatives.
More than half of all satellites in space are already Starlink at around 5,000, with 12,000 planned in the near future and up to 42,000 as a later expansion.
I’d love to be able to get a usable terrestrial alternative at my place. Wonky 4G ain’t it. 5G is years away, if it ever gets here. Fibre? Perish the thought.
I would like to point out that they did ask for permission. Though obviously they didn’t ask for permission from every government in the world, nor did they ask the astronomy community.
However, rocket go zoom then land without boom is fun to watch.
Yeah, Musk is a true innovater by having them blow up the concrete launchpad on launch instead…
The government got more money from the patents NASA got then it cost to fund NASA. Privatizing space hurts everyone except the rich asshole who gets the parents.
I don’t know why people are downvoting me, I’d love it if NASA could innovate the way private companies can, but they just can’t. The way SpaceX is currently developing Starship would not be possible if NASA was doing it. (And no I’m not endorsing Musk I wish the company was owned by someone else)
They literally don’t innovate in the same way. Like you said, if NASA blew up anything there’d be an investigation, making it impossible for them to iterate rapidly, meaning they are unable to innovate in the way private companies can.
If you read all the comments by givesomefucks you will see that they ignore context and make wild assumptions repeatedly. They are on the hate musk train and not addressing the topic.
You: SpaceX?
givesomefuck: musk is terrible, musk blow up things, musk stole my girl/boyfriend
You: Okay, but what I was asking was...
givesomefucks: musk is the worst human ever, EVER!!!!
Dude or lady is triggered. I get it musk is a douche of the highest order but givessomefucks has let it cause them to miss context and make wild assumptions. Sad really. I wish we could talk about things without whatever bullshit their on. My original question was only answered to the extent of musk is bad.
They are slow but it is by design. They want things to be safe. Some say they over engineer things but I think when we are talking about people, that is needed.
Yeah, but there’s also the cognitive dissonance of you saying SpaceX is fun because they don’t explode…
But they do explode. Waaaaay more than NASA. Because if a NASA launch goes bad, everyone pays attention. If SpaceX goes bad, people just shrug
So by your own metrics you just said…
NASA is better than SpaceX.
No matter what position I took, it would have disagreed with your comment, because your comment disagrees with itself. Which explains why you think spacex is a positive.
SpaceX has only had 2 mission failures out of 274 total missions. Since 2017 SpaceX has had a 100% success rate which is a vast majority of its total missions. The recent explosions have been test rockets and expected to blow up, it’s how they learn and innovate so quickly. NASA takes billions of dollars and 10+ years to successfully launch a rocket on the first attempt. It’s just 2 different approaches to design and innovation.
Nah dude. You don’t understand. A guy we don’t like is tangibly related to the space program. Fuck all them scientists and engineers. They’re all evil. Every. Single. One of them.
You may hate Starlink for what ever reason and Ol Musky, but SpaceX has completely changed the game for launch capabilities and proved rocket reuse works.
It’s easy for “SpaceX to explode way more” when NASA has launched a single rocket in the last 13 years. Are you referring to Falcon 9? Starship? Falcon 1?
Some people can’t get over the fact that spaceX is a net positive for humans. Just as Tesla helped push other manufacturers into the world of EVs. They just hate musk to the point that anything he is associated with is bad.
but I love that he created the market for electric cars
This is like saying OJ Simpson invented Smuckers Uncrustables so he’s not all bad…
Firstly, it’s not true.
Secondly, even if it was true, it doesn’t amount to enough to celebrate him.
Because putting peanut butter and jelly in a sandwich was already a thing that was popular. It just became worse for the environment and more expensive for consumers by individuall packaging them and requiring them to be frozen.
Your second is an opinion piece that doesn’t back up their claims… And I doubt the authors judgement because they said up to 2016 no one was betting on EVs, despite virtually all of the big companies being in the game at that point.
If you set out to prove some people believe it wouldn’t happen without Tesla, congrats.
But I can find an article from someone who thinks the world is flat too, that doesn’t mean the world is flat.
You have yet to spout anything but your opinion, which goes against everyone else’s opinion.
The big 3 were not taking EV cars seriously. They did enough to show they were doing it but their focus was ICE.
Tesla changed that. You are free to stomp your foot all you want but it doesn’t change that Tesla drove the EV market forward. They dominate the EV market for that reason and have the highest percentage of people who would buy another Tesla EV.
The first link addressed his claim pretty thoroughly. I suspect you commented that assuming most people would not read it to verify your claim. I have seen you spouting bullshit all throughout this comment section so I had to read it so that I can call you out. You're either lying or extremely bad at understanding the article. He provided links, you provided bullshit.
Here is the actual quote from the second article you take issue with: "But Elon Musk's company has shown that EVs are a viable way to build a business. As recently as 2016, the jury was still out on that matter." So you twisted shit so much you changed the meaning. That's either done in bad faith or you're extremely bad a reading comprehension.
So could you name any EVs that were available from the big companies in 2016?
I hate that I am here defending Tesla, but I hate the bullshit coming from you even more.
At least you finally admitted it, can you stop replying to every comment in this thread now? That’d be great, but I’m fine going back to ignoring you too.
Once again you miss the context. I'm leaning heavily towards you having issues with reading comprehension. At least that's better than commenting in bad faith.
This motherfucker is like: "you're being mean, go away, I'm not listening." But then replies to my comment first. While once again ignoring most of the comment he's replying to.
I'm not going away. I'm having fun with you at this point. :)
EVs are still going to be the wrong answer to the problem. Sure, more efficient than combustable, but still vastly less efficient than good public transport systems, walkable/bikeable cities, etc. If Elon really wanted to save the planet, he’d be building bullet trains.
everyone was moving to EV’s with or without tesla. if you want to credit anyone go back to the Prius way back in the late 90s. They set the trend, Tesla jumped on that trend.
I'm not defending musk. So tired of that qualifier in this thread.
The prius is not an EV it's a hybrid and nobody thought they were cool. Even tree huggers like me. Tesla made electric cars cool until everyone found out how poorly they were assembled. Then the other manufacturers, seeing that electric cars could be profitable, started tooling their assembly lines. You have your history completely backwards.
I’m not defending musk. So tired of that qualifier in this thread.
did not say you were.
The prius is not an EV it’s a hybrid and nobody thought they were cool.
it sold incredibly well and proved that there was a market, and yes it was a hybrid as the technology wasn’t there. do tesla get kudos for waiting for battery technology now?
You have your history completely backwards.
do you think that the prius came out after a tesla? you need to explain this one.
The new Prius Prime is cool af in my opinion.
it doesn’t matter what you find personally cool for what it’s worth, then or now.
If I didn't put that qualifier there would be comments talking shit about musk. Read the rest of this comment section and it's clear as day.
The prius did not sell incredibly well. That is completely false. It sold well enough to be profitable but even a standard Corolla sold more year after year. It took a decade or more before any other serious options existed.
The previous paragraph covers your next question. You have your history wrong about how well the Prius sold and how long until EV's became desirable.
A better wording would have been that the new Prius is more desirable than the previous generations. Which reinforces the previous Prius not "being cool."
The prius did not sell incredibly well. That is completely false. It sold well enough to be profitable but even a standard Corolla sold more year after year.
… uh, yes. the traditional fossil fuel based card sold better than a car selling to a new market. do you want to compare it to, oh i don’t know, a ford focus too? are you trying to talk about the hybrid version that came out in the 2010’s like 15 years after the prius?
if you want to make the argument that the prius wasn’t instrumental in proving the EV market, good luck. you won’t find much backing with these talking points.
Because there was nothing else to compare it to at the time. It was the first viable hybrid, we agree on that. The part that I'm having a hard time explaining is that it was not hugely successful and not the motivation for all current EV's. It wasn't even a plug-in hybrid until 2012. That is 9 years AFTER Tesla.
Major manufactures did not attempt EVs until Tesla made a killing on them. Most of them did not even make serious attempts at hybrids until the mid 2000's.
Because there was nothing else to compare it to at the time.
grab this thread, you can maybe start to understand how they were instrumental in creating and proving the EV market that Tesla would eventually capitalise on top of
I understand your argument, I just don't think it is right.
The Prius never motivated other car manufactures to make EVs. Seriously, tooling the assembly lines did not begin until after Tesla.
Why did it take a decade to go from Prius to Tesla, but a only a few years after Tesla for other manufactures to start seriously producing hybrids and EVs?
I mean the answer to your last thing is battery technology. the lithium ion battery boom is the real driver of EV’s in general. you really gotta understand the role that Tesla played here is to surf on the wave, not create it.
a bunch of weirdo cars came out that were based on lead acid batteries in the 70s? i think, that killed that market
Prius proved the market existed with their Hybrid, that demand was there. they also totally dominated the market with their brand and no one else was tooled up for it.
Batteries with the capability of pushing hybrids, ev’s boomed into mass scale in the mid-2000’s
Tesla and many others take advantage of both of these things happening to great success.
Tesla built charging infrastructure. Nobody was willing to rely on an EV, that’s “electric vehicle”, because they didn’t trust the range or the ability to recharge.
That’s why instead of producing EVs, it produced one hybrid, which never at any moment ever asked a consumer to rely entirely on electricity for their transportation.
I mean the answer to your last thing is battery technology.
I agree that battery tech is what brought about full EVs. I still disagree that the Prius did.
Tesla and many others take advantage of both of these things happening to great success.
Could you please name a just couple of the "many others" that successfully implemented the new battery chemistry into their cars? Actually just one other would do. I apologize if that sounds rude it's not my intention. I can't think of a better way of wording this.
I can’t say that without Tesla EV would be as popular, mainly because at the time when Tesla started was 9 years after the GM EV1 was a failure. I don’t think other companies would have seen building EV as a good investment, but who could know?
So I have been reading around in the comments here and I get the distinct impression that you are trolling, or at least attempting to.
You display a weird mix of ignorance and laziness in not reading up on the basics, while you also often try to dumb down or nitpick an answer given to you.
That isn’t how this works, there are no simple answers. Often there are a dozen answers to the same question, depending on who you ask. As a starting point, you could read up (or listen to an audiobook or something) on Marx and his writings. Virtually all leftist movements and ideologies make reference to or are derived from his.
I guess its all trolling now, asking questions. Fuck these computers, everyone acts like its the cold war and the feds are everywhere.
You display a weird mix of ignorance and laziness in not reading up on the basics, while you also often try to dumb down or nitpick an answer given to you.
didn’t change anything up, if you thought I was dumbing them down they must have been pretty dumb anyway.
No simple answers? I know, im just trying to ask why their answer is simple, but yours ain’t. Seems like yall think differently and picked your own sides. Although they seem to have picked a strange one Ill say that.
People are annoyed with you because you want everything a simple look at Wikipedia can teach you, spoon fed to you in the comments.
The whole original post is a collection of uninformed ramblings, and you expect people to engage with it. (You “kinda like the leftist vibe and hate capitalism”? Do you even know what those words actually mean?)
Improve the quality of your questions by acquiring the knowledge to even know what you are talking about on your own, then you will get quality replies.
People are annoyed with you because you want everything a simple look at Wikipedia can teach you, spoon fed to you in the comments.
Good lord yall apparently cant handle a question. Do you have any research besides using a wiki for children? Apparently who gives a shit about learning or anything, you can just spend a second looking at an article edited by plebs and thats good enough according to these chucklefucks.
The whole original post is a collection of uninformed ramblings, and you expect people to engage with it. (You “kinda like the leftist vibe and hate capitalism”? Do you even know what those words actually mean?)
The only uninformed rambling was the mess of comments I got. One recommended a childrens novel!
I like commie shit, I want to get rid of the rich bigwigs and start fixing this mess. Capitalism seems to just be trying to make money, and I hate greedy bastards. I understand that ‘vibe’ means ‘the mood’ and the like. Its not that hard to learn words.
Boycotts aren’t going to kill a company. They are to influence them.
I did boycott ChikFilA when it came out they were supporting homophobic asshats. And once they announced they were dropping those charities, I stopped boycotting.
I use CVS over Walgreens as long as I can get my prescriptions at CVS due to Walgreens stances against women’s health. If Walgreens ever cleans up, I would happily use them more often because they are more convenient and inexpensive for me.
I only go to Shell gas stations as a last resort because they blast ads at you while pumping gas.
I've seen this mute mentioned, but never had it work. Is it for real? Every place has these ads now 😐 I don't get fuel on my personal vehicle very much much but I drove a lot for work and it is awful.
They’re still run by evangelical Christians, so I wouldn’t expect a Pride month advert campaign coming from them any time soon.
But yes, they stopped donating to a particular group of charities in 2018/2019. Part of the “then they started donating again” claim was timing and tax records, but the actual donation was made before they changed policy and stopped.
Because money laundering regulations in the UK (and I believe in the US and Europe) at least have made free use of one’s cash pretty difficult:
Designated accounts to transfer cash so that you have at least twice as many transactions to do as necessary. Inability to remove modest amounts of cash from your own account, or even pay it in.
Corporate banks operating HFT and dark pools to significantly push up the cost of personal share dealing.
Water companies dumping sewage into rivers and failing to fix leaks whilst raising water processing charges and bonuses to the board.
BBC and their sponsor-a-paedo TV tax collected by harassing elderly people, guilty until proved innocent. Used to be wonderful, educational and funny. Now useless woke shit.
Politics. Come back Guido, all is forgiven. Thieving Boris Johnson handing out multi million pound contracts to supply PPE to his local pub landlord (who have no fucking clue about that sector) and his bunch of duplicitous cronies.
I might have got carried away towards the end. Sorry, not sorry.
I think 0.19 is reverting that behaviour, because it was indeed a certified bad idea.
I think the idea was to attempt to bulletproof potentially crappy clients especially after the XSS incident, but the problem is it’s simply not even always rendered in a web context which makes the processing kind of a pain.
Wouldn’t surprise me if it becomes double and triple encoded too at times because of the federation. Do you encode again or trust that the remote sent you urlencoded data already?
Best format is the original format and transform as late as possible, ideally in clients where there’s awareness of what characters are special. It is in web, not so much in an Android or terminal app.
I don’t think the Lemmy devs are particularly experienced web developers in general. There’s been a fair amount of dubious API design decisions like passing auth as a GET parameter… Thankfully they also fixed that one in 0.19.
Sorry for the late reply, it's been a week... but yeah passing creds in the Get is very bad for multiple reasons. For instance if you pass the creds on a page that contains ads or trackers, they are probably going to store the url AND your credentials and propagate them to a million systems of third parties. That's. Not. Good.
Because then you need to take care everywhere to decode it as needed and also make sure you never double-encode it.
For example, do other servers receive it pre-encoded? What if the remote instance doesn’t do that, how do you ensure what other instances send you is already encoded correctly? Do you just encode whatever you receive, at risk of double encoding it? And generally, what about use cases where you don’t need it, like mobile apps?
Data should be transformed where it needs it, otherwise you always add risks of messing it up, which is exactly what we’re seeing. That encoding is reversible, but then it’s hard to know how many times it may have been encoded. For example, if I type & which is already an entity, do you detect that and decode it even though I never intended to because I’m posting an HTML snippet?
Right now it’s so broken that if you edit a post, you get an editor… with escaped HTML entities. What happens if you save your post after that? It’s double encoded! Now everyone and every app has to make sure to decode HTML entities and it leads to more bugs.
There is exactly one place where it needs to encode, and that’s in web clients, more precisely, when it’s being displayed as HTML. That’s where it should be encoded. Mobile apps don’t care they don’t even render HTML to begin with. Bots and most things using the API don’t care. They shouldn’t have to care because it may be rendered as HTML somewhere. It just creates more bugs and more work for pretty much everyone involved. It sucks.
Now we have an even worse problem is that we don’t know what post is encoded which way, so once 0.19 rolls out and there’s version mismatches it’s going to be a shitshow and may very well lead to another XSS incident.
It still leads to unsolvable problems like, what is expected when two instances federate content with eachother? What if you use a web app to use a third party instance and it spits out unsanitized data?
If you assume it’s part of the API contract, then an evil instance can send you unescaped content and you got an exploit. If you escape it you’ll double escape it from well behaved instances. This applies to apps too: now if Voyager for example starts expecting pre-sanitized data from the API, and it makes an API call to an evil instance that doesn’t? Bam, you’ve got yourself potential XSS. There’s nothing they can do to prevent it. Either it’s inherently unsafe, or safe but will double-escape.
You end up making more vulnerabilities through edge cases than you solve by doing that. Now all an attacker needs to do is find a way to trick you into thinking they have sanitized data when it’s not.
The only safe transport for user data is raw. You can never assume any user/remote input is pre-sanitized. Apps, even web ones, shouldn’t assume the data is sanitized, they should sanitize it themselves because only then you can guarantee that it will come out correctly, and safely.
This would only work if you own both the server and the UI that serves it. It immediately falls apart when you don’t control the entire pipeline from submission to display, and on the fediverse with third party clients and apps and instances, you inherently can’t trust anything.
Sorry for the late reply, but the point is that there is no trivial way to detect whether and how many times something has been encoded. You may end up with multiple levels of encoding in multiple systems and everything becomes untractable. Morever, as i said this doesn't have to be a problem, as you can just decode everything as much as you can BEFORE you put it in the db, as the db can handle all of that by itself. Just let it do its job. Paradoxically, if you use only channels that support utf8 and don't apply any transformation, your data is already perfect as it is. Then it is the job of the client to do what it needs to be able to render properly, but for instance a non-html client shouldn't need to use html libraries to be able to strip html stuff from the text before it can be displayed.
You don’t have to wonder about what the Lemmy devs do and don’t know. They aren’t cloistered or unreachable, you can just join matrix room and talk to them nearly at any time.
The main thing halting progress on the code is time and money. The devs are under strain from the amount of fixes and issues from the sudden burst in lemmy users so they are in an operational mode that isn’t ideal. For my part I’m one of the monthly contributors to the project; Lemmy is community developed software, not corporate.
To be honest it's already incredible that the platform works at all and has all these features. Great job, really! I'm not being sarcastic, it needs improvement but it's a great achievement.
asklemmy
Oldest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.