AFAIK Blåhaj became popular with trans people naturally, not due to any sort of marketing on IKEA’s part. How can it be rainbow capitalism without intent?

Also, remember it is still popular as a kids’ toy too. Mine have had one since they were toddlers, and (so far, anyway) there’s no indication that either of them is trans. Sometimes a shark is just a shark.

The word you’re looking for is “emoluments.”

It’s not a “privacy for you right now” thing; it’s a “big picture/health of the Web as a whole” thing. I explained already in other replies.

My last pair of lenses cost me 300€.

Ah, see, that’s what I was afraid of: Zenni is stupid cheap; the glasses I’m trying to replace were about $70. Granted, that was more years ago than glasses are supposed to go between prescriptions, but still, I was hoping for approximately an order of magnitude less cost for these DIY-cut lenses.

Hehe sorry, I’m addicted to that shape - not for the style, but because small, round glasses are the type of glasses that sit closest to your face, so you get a huge field of vision with small lenses, and you can rest your head on a pillow without breaking the temples. No other style of glasses gives you that.

I like the idea of pillow-compatible glasses, but I already have a bit of resemblance to Harry Pottery that I’m not exactly looking to enhance. I tend to go for rectangular lenses.

I’m curious about what your costs are in actual dollars, although Trivex isn’t right for me because my R_x is so strong that I need a higher refractive index. I also appreciate that your 3D printed glasses link included a video about how the lens edging machine works.

Do you know of any other 3D printed frames that look… less Harry Potter-y?

I haven’t asked a brick-and-mortar shop yet because I had found out that I couldn’t just buy identical new ones minutes before writing the post. I’ll try that, although I’ll have to do some searching to find an optician around here that isn’t a chain.

How does the process change when they’re rimless glasses (so the only things I need to be concerned about are getting the pupillary distance and axis right, and then drilling a few holes in the correct spots – the edge is just flat-ground instead of a V-bevel and can be whatever arbitrary shape I want)? Surely that reduces the need for a fancy shape-copying machine, right?

The rest of GrapheneOS doesn’t influence how web developers design websites, or what fingerprinting and other private information the browser allows sites to steal from users.

It’s not just Manifest V3, either. It’s also the “Web Environment Integrity” API (read: DRM for websites) and “WebMCP” and such. Those are the sorts of monopolistic practices and enshittification you’re supporting and endorsing whenever you use a Chromium-based browser, including Vanadium.

You need to learn the difference between a workaround and a solution.

Also, don’t try to pretend that a normal person is going to live as an outlaw just so they can avoid enshittification. Most people will comply, and society as a whole – which includes you, even if you don’t comply yourself! – will suffer for it.

As a GrapheneOS user I’m aware of the developers’ arguments for it, but it has the same problem as every other Chromium browser: Google controls the upstream code, so it’s still going to contribute to Google’s harmful hegemony over web standards.

It probably is more “secure” than Firefox, though, measured against the GrapheneOS devs’ threat model. But my problem with Chromium is one they don’t even try to address.

I use Firefox on both my phone and my desktop.

YSK that every Chromium-based browser is harmful and should be avoided, regardless of how up-to-date it is.

Unless your prep includes “fight against it politically, tooth and nail,” you’re only delaying the inevitable.

There is no such thing as a technological solution to what is fundamentally a political problem. Ultimately, the fascists pushing this shit have to be destroyed or they will destroy us.

Because I have self-respect.

You forgot the leading @ and your username mention turned into a mailto link.

I’m not convinced it wasn’t mostly dead before Steam, TBH. I mean I guess there was “lending” (read: copying), but there was never a “GameStop for PC games” the way there was for console games. And even the “lending” was somewhat curtailed by CD-keys and account registration before Steam existed.

!bestoflemmy@lemmy.world

The hard part is that turning the raw data into actual forecasts requires a lot of processing power.

Hmm, I hadn’t really thought about that; I was just thinking about stations reporting current conditions. But yeah, you’re right that that’s the important part. Is weather modeling software another one of those areas like CAD where the state-of-the-art is locked up in proprietary shit, or is it government/scientific enough that the software is public? If one were to start building a distributed weather prediction system, are we talking about refactoring existing software to be distributed or reading research papers and implementing algorithms from scratch?

The fucked-up part is that there are various networks of croudsourced weather data, but I think most or all of them are proprietary, or at least centralized (which means enshittification could put consumer API access at risk).

We need a service that’s peer-to-peer (or at least federated) and open-data-licensed. And also not affiliated with the National Weather Service because Trumpism puts even that one at risk.

• https://www.weather.gov/cle/CWOP (US government (i.e. Public Domain), centralized)
• https://www.wunderground.com/pws/overview (proprietary, centralized)
• https://weathercloud.net/en (proprietary, centralized)

Dumb terminals don’t need much RAM. Unfortunately, the minimal RAM would come with maximum rentiership and exploitation.