I feel this is a bit of a moot point from the White House. Memory-safe languages have been around for decades. I feel like the amount of C/C++ out there isn't so much that people think having dangerous stuff around is good, but more that nobody really wants to pay to change it.
otl
Depends how you look at it! Here’s me accessing Mastodon and the fediverse via email: https://lemmy.world/post/11020167 I’ve written a a couple more prototypes to connect one to the other. If anyone is interested I could write up more about how it works or do a more public demo
Not included in the above, but handy is also an alternative web UI for Reuters news: https://neuters.de
no you didn't Mr. Simpson, no one can
took me a couple but worth it
The other fun one is that the continental US (AKA everything except Alaska) is just about the same size as Australia. Then when you consider that there's 49 states versus Australia's 7, you can see how the numbers come about.
well there was probably awareness of ideas of sacrifice, punishment, right/wrong. Old ideas...
Good question! Sorry if this answer is weird :)
For me, I don't actually interact from Mastodon per se. I wrote a couple of read-only Lemmy & Mastodon clients. One for a weird text editing environment I use (https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/1035382) and via email (https://gts.olowe.co/@o/statuses/01HMQ9N4HQ2ETGZWJS49K5NG5Y). To reply to or create posts, I use a write-only Mastodon client I wrote.
My idea is to exercise the fediverse. In principal I don't think I should need separate accounts for Lemmy, PeerTube, Mastodon, Kbin, Akkoma, etc.
Right now I'm replying from an account on lemmy.sdf.org as I can't reply from GoToSocial (Lemmy and GoToSocial don't work well together right now) and my Mastodon server (hachyderm.io) has a post limit of 500 characters.
Ah ha makes sense now! The "Replying to comments" section of that article explains exactly what's happening. If I understand correctly the community itself (!privacy@lemmy.ml in my above example) is not notified of my reply from Mastodon. If the community did know, then it would broadcast a notification of the activity to whoever else is subscribed to !privacy@lemmy.ml.
I honestly find it worrying that someone would think it's some sort of deeply ingrained human trait when it's clearly not culturally universal (eg. small hunter-gatherer tribes wouldn't exist otherwise) and not present through all of history.
I think "growth" is a strong signal for people to put faith and trust into something. And that these emotions have influenced our behaviour for a long time.
Why did the Roman empire keep expanding? What made them want more? I'm not a historian nor an anthropologist (far from either!). But this feels like "line go up" behaviour. What would it mean for those in power to communicate that some part of the empire was receding? Even if, overall, the empire was objectivetly huge relative to other organised groups?
One thing I think about is there could be eroding confidence and trust of those in power by colleagues and the general population. If people lose faith, the powerful lose power; they lose ability to influence behaviour. Growth is obsessed over because it's a means to capture influence over the means of production (and capture profit).
The line has to go up because the current economic system demands it has to go up
What about outside of economics? Even metrics on https://fedidb.org: shrinking numbers are coloured red. Growing numbers green. Green = good, red = bad.
Another thought. The other day I was at a cricket match. Grand final. Because the home team was losing, the stadium started to empty. It wasn't about enjoying the individual balls/plays. Supporters were not satisfied with coming second (an amazing achievement, much "profit"!), it needed to be more.
To stretch this shitty metaphor further, when the supporters (investors?) lost confidence in their ability to deliver more, they just abandoned the entire match (enterprise?) altogether!
Again: I'm not stating anything here as fact. I'm just absolutely dumbfounded as to why "line go up" is, as you say, such an obsession. I hear you when you say that it's a consequence of how the modern economy works. That makes sense. I guess I wonder what would happen if we snapped our fingers and we could start again. I wonder what the economy system would look like. Would we still be obsessed with growth?
of course!