The stupid, old, irritating cycle of: You implement against a standard, and then you implement exceptions for third party users of the standard. 😔

There have been reports of AI data centers further draining water reserves in areas of non abundant nor sufficiently recovering water. Which has not only environment but social and human consequences in the area.

Listen, people from the former Soviet bloc,

I’m confused who you’re addressing your comment to. The article is about a French town. That’s not the former soviet bloc.

You say a few hours, but it seems they were locked out for days.

If they also did a short pre investigation, was it in adequate form, if this kind of thing is the result?

We only see from the outside, and they say they can’t really see much internally either. Send all very wishy washy. If that’s the case, is that enough to block accounts for days, it should they do their full investigation and then block to reduce false positive impact?

I would prefer Murderous Monster

They won’t even see you when you get close enough

Insane

Our migration was a mess. And took a long time. I don’t know how much our contracted company was at fault. They certainly didn’t do a good job. We have Jira extended for time management to billing and staff pay and whatnot.

I have some CSS Hacks to make the cloud version usable, but the DOM is a mess. Only test id attributes are reasonable, stable, and descriptive. Everything else is random in terms of class and id.

Occasionally, something changes. Despite a dedicated maintenance window by Atlassian, and marketing towards predictiveness and all that positive stuff, occasionally something changes without warning, without announcement. And you’re left wondering - is my memory getting that bad? Is this new?

My last highlight is that they converted migrated images in Jira ticket descriptions into some square image control. Something you can’t even use for new images. Pasting or dropping an image into the description will lead to something different. When it’s attached as an attachment, like it was in the past, you can only include it into the description as a fixed attachment either inline control or inline fixed preview control.

If you have an old description with rectangular screenshots, you know, possible because you have a widescreen monitor, or because we have width space and make use of it for content, the square adds a ton of whitespace. Make the image big enough to be readable, and the only thing on your entire screen is the image and dead space, half of the height dead space.

There’s many annoying and horrendous things.

Worst is we contracted some third party for a custom menu and whatnot. We have a browser extension for that, for Jira and Confluence. I have all three functionality sets disabled because it makes it even slower or broken.

It works for the most part, but man, there’s so many irritations and annoyances.

evolves robots.txt instructions by adding an automated licensing layer that’s designed to block bots that don’t fairly compensate creators for content

robots.txt - the well known technology to block bad-intention bots /s

What’s automated about the licensing layer? At some point, I started skimming the article. They didn’t seem clear about it. The AI can “automatically” parse it?

# NOTICE: all crawlers and bots are strictly prohibited from using this 
# content for AI training without complying with the terms of the RSL 
# Collective AI royalty license. Any use of this content for AI training 
# without a license is a violation of our intellectual property rights.

License: https://rslcollective.org/royalty.xml

Yeah, this is as useless as I thought it would be. Nothing here is actively blocking.

I love that the XML then points to a text/html content website. I guess nothing for machine parsing, maybe for AI parsing.

I don’t remember which AI company, but they argued they’re not crawlers but agents acting on the users behalf for their specific request/action, ignoring robots.txt. Who knows how they will react. But their incentives and history is ignoring robots.txt.

Why am I is this comment so negative. Oh well.

That assumes the salt was also compromised/extracted. Unfortunately, they don’t say. Which one could read as not compromised. But they’re not transparently explicit about it.

I was surprised they didn’t recommend changing passwords elsewhere, too. I would also prefer them to be transparent about how they were vulnerable/attacked.

They say password were securely hashed, following best practices, which would include a salt, which is different elsewhere.

I started buying Intel CPUs because they allowed me to build high-performance computers that ran Linux flawlessly and produced little noise.

I find it funny that they mention noise level, as if the CPU itself were making noise. I’ve bought silent fans all my life, separately from CPUs.

Krass, danke für das ausführliche Teilen deiner Erfahrungen und Einschätzung.

Seems like lemmy.world has the opengraph/teaser stuff disabled? When I open the post on lemmyworld, without an account, it doesn’t have a teaser at all.

If you open this comment source link it may very well show.

The interoperability of ActivityPub is nice, but all these differences make it confusing and cumbersome too.

They loose everything without Ukraines allies switching to a war time economy.

The most insane part of their comment: “The West is losing”, when only one party of “The West” is actually fighting.

Ukraine is fighting with the support of others. It’s not all of them fighting the war.

If you go there, Russia has been attacking The West for many years, through hybrid warfare. Yet, The West remains collected and relatively stable, without resorting to aggression. Their countermeasures are defensive by nature, yet cause disruption deep into Russia anyway.

The disparity is baffling.

Coming back to the original claim of the commenter, the most influence is on other nations like China, the USA, and EU. They indirectly dictate how the war will develop. When looking at prognosis, any look into the current state and development is arbitrary when a single external factor would change everything.

I hate being hinted and asked to click on the link, so I save you a click:

Are you using a different client? Without teaser texts? The Lemmy website mentions Nova in the teaser.

Oh no, they already have a Farewell Collection! /s

I’m not sure if it was in that article or in another comment section, but someone said

a small group of people will fight to control the narrative so they can spin it any which way they want.

Your source for your broad categorization and claims seems incredibly weak. “Someone said, somewhere, I’m not sure where I read it, though.”

Wikipedia tracks anonymous contributions, too. You could check the Article and Article Discussion pages histories before making these claims, and before concluding from one comment that Wikipedia has the same systematic issues like Reddit or other closed-group moderated platforms.

As far as I see it, Wikipedia has a different depth and transparency on guidelines, requirements, open discussion, and actions. It has a lot of additional safeguards compared to something like Reddit. Admins are elected, not “first-come”.

What I find much more plausible than “they didn’t want to accept an anonymous contribution” is that the anonymous contributor may not have adequately sourced their claims and contributions. Even if they did, I find it much more likely that it may have been removed, then a discussion was done in the page discussion, and then it was added back.

Of course, instead of theorizing what happened in that case I could have checked Wikipedia too. But I also want to make a point about my general and systematic expectation of how Wikipedia works, which other platforms do not have.

I meant programming decisions, not content. Dunno if that was misunderstood.

As zaphod says in their comment response, arte already broadcasts documentaries about plenty of other countries.

Where does it say they’re including them in programming?

Broadcasting translations doesn’t say anything about who participates.