This looks great. I was thinking about buying an Android ebook reader and a bluetooth keyboard in order to cobble together something like this for myself. But if this is less than the cost of an ebook reader by itself, that’s even better.

Bleh, I really hate to side with Google, especially when releasing this documentation benefits users and hiding it benefits Google.

But it seems weird for this new license to be legally binding. If someone committed this to the wrong repo, and that person didn’t have legal authority over the original content, then how can they have legally relicensed it?

Unfortunately, this seems to be the only option, besides using your own domain so that you control forwarding yourself. Basically, pay someone like Firefox Relay to do forwarding, or do your own forwarding. Firefox Relay does give you five email addresses for free, which is cool. (https://relay.firefox.com/#pricing)

I’ve noticed that the “+” sign trick with Gmail just doesn’t work at all anymore. Anyone that wants to maliciously send you emails knows to remove what comes after the + sign, so that you can’t tell which of your sub-addresses was originally used. And anyone that hacks a database to steal email addresses knows to remove it as well, to cover their tracks.

Or “things you possess,” either. I remember being told (maybe in a college class, but I don’t remember exactly) that you can be compelled to give up the key to a lock, but not the combination to a lock.

I haven’t heard anything bad about Grayjay before; what’s the issue with it?

That looks cool, I hadn’t heard of Circles before. I want to check it out now. I’m curious if it somehow keeps your data private from the server owner. That feels like the missing feature in most federated, privacy-focused social networks.

Side note: looks like it’s made by Futo; I hadn’t realized they were working on something like that. I’ve been using another one of their apps, Grayjay for almost all of my mobile Youtube viewing lately. It works great.

It sounds like the answer to “can I run this application on RISC-V” is very dependent on what the backend for that application is. What’s the backend stack for your websites? Are they static HTML sites, or do they have other components? Someone else mentioned that they built postgres and mariadb Docker images for RISC-V, but I don’t even know which programming languages can be compiled for RISC-V right now.

is the mainline situation any better than with ARM?

Unfortunately, sounds like “no” currently. The ones that let you install Debian usually provide some kind of custom Debian image for that specific SBC. Like you, I’m not really a fan of that. But apparently there are some desktop motherboards with RISC-V CPUs coming out. Hopefully that will increase the chance of things getting supported in mainline distros.

The progress bar screen during an AMD driver update. Cycles between ads for video games, ads for CPUs, and a “how are we doing” survey.

Basketball courts too, newly added in the last couple years. There’s one sponsor logo physically printed on the court, and one that’s digitally added for the TV broadcast (tailored to your location, of course).

I was watching a game a few weeks ago and the superimposed logo kept screwing up. It was moving with the camera instead of being fixed on the ground, and sometimes it wouldn’t be cropped around the players, it would just go on top of them. It was kind of amusing. They removed it after a few minutes.

I agree with your point, but I also agree with the parent post as well. Advertising and tracking can be considered separate issues while also both being bad. I’d also say tracking is almost always bad, whereas there are advertisements that I think are perfectly fine.

People have been talking about how manipulative advertising can be long before targeting individuals was possible. (Like Joe Camel.)

But I also think that there is a whole new level of maliciousness to these highly-targeted ad services that can show you specific content based on a personality profile, formed about you by aggregating data across many different areas of your life. It’s related to advertising in general, but takes it to such an invasive extreme that it’s worth singling out on its own.

That is absolutely a fair point: Jesus, as Christians believe in him, did not exist, even if there was a religious teacher named Jesus (or Yeshu, whatever) who was alive at that time.

But, there’s a part B for that point, and I think it’s an important one: there is no “book version” of Jesus. The Bible isn’t one book, it’s a collection of many separate writings, written over many years by many different people, and they didn’t even agree on what they were writing about. Christians like to think of the Bible as one consistent work, and it isn’t. (The scholarly term for that is “univocality” – the Bible is not univocal.) So it’s not even possible to point to a Jesus figure as described in the Bible, since there is not a singular, consistent Jesus described in the Bible.

The general consensus among historians is that there probably was a real Jesus. Not the walk-on-water Jesus, but some kind of Jewish religious leader, and he was executed. Which means that some of the books of the New Testament describe a real-ish version of him, especially the earlier books. Then, as the messiah narrative starts to take off, the later books in the New Testament get increasingly magical and describe a very unrealistic version of him.

The Wikipedia page about historically-accurate Jesus is a good starting point for info about “real Jesus.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus

I also recommend looking for podcasts and YouTube videos featuring Bart Ehrman.

What I’m saying here does not at all contradict your comment, I just think it’s a good idea if we atheists are always very keen on the fact that the Bible doesn’t consistently describe much of anything. That does mean, though, that some parts of the Bible may describe something historically accurate, and that gives no credibility to the more magical parts of the Bible. Seems like the consensus in this thread is to throw away the whole idea of Jesus, and that doesn’t match what real historians believe.