PaintedSnail

Without a central server, hostname resolution is handled with mDNS. It is designed to do exactly what you’re asking: allow you to resolve hostnames to IP addresses without a DNS server. A node simply broadcasts (multicasts) a request for who has a name, and whichever node has it responds with their IP.

So why did the get rid of Wordpad?

That is a much more interesting response, thank you.

I know very well that a politician is not required to listen to their voters. That is the nature of a representative democracy, and it has its pluses and minuses; but that’s another topic. A politician will do what they want once in office. Sometimes they do it for their own selfish reasons, sometimes they do it because they know something the American public doesn’t, sometimes they do things because they are weighing opposing agendas differently. That is why it is important to push for candidates that have principles that are the most aligned with yours. Then even if they are driven by their own selfish reasons, at least their actions are more likely to align with your desires.

That’s not to say that voters have no power at all. We got Trump because his principles (such as they are) aligned with a large enough portion of the American public that the Republic party thought he was their best chance of winning. Make no mistake that the Democrats DO want to win. Voters need to show them that a candidate whose principles are more left leaning is their best chance of winning. That is what the primaries are for. You will note that only two political parties even have primaries.

I believe you have a misunderstanding that anyone thinks that having to choose the lesser of two evils is a good thing. It’s not. It’s only better than choosing the greater of two evils. The main point that I have been trying to make is that NOT choosing the lesser evil is functionally equivalent to choosing the greater evil, even if the choice made is to not make a choice.

This is because there isn’t a better choice; there is no “no evil” choice. Even not choosing is still a choice. Unless you know of one and would care to enlighten me on the specifics of that choice. So far, the only point I’ve seen you try to make is that not choosing is the best choice; something that I vehemently disagree with.

That doesn’t disprove what I’m saying. That’s just your feeling with no evidence to back it up.

I have history to backup my claims. Yes, we’ve shifted right due to incrementalism because people on the right are more likely to vote, so it demonstrably does work. There’s no reason we can’t shift back if people who want change actually vote for it, rather than withholding their votes for a “perfect” solution.

That is reductionist to the point of obsursity.

Republicans are demonstrably by more fascist.

Not voting against Republicans keeps more fascism in place.

Therefore, not voting only increases fascism. Voting for someone that can’t win against the Republicans increases fascism.

And before you say voting for Democrats also increases fascism, they are already less fascist than what is currently in place. Having anyone else, even a Democrat, in office will be less fascism.

Vote to decrease fascism. Move in that direction. Not voting only pushes us toward more fascism.

There is not choice available right now to remove fascism entirely. We must show politicians that they stand to gain by moving away from it. Not voting doesn’t do that.

If we want to push things back to the left, we absolutely have to show support for more left candidates in the primaries.

But if we don’t show them that we’re willing to vote, we’re just going to get candidates that chase the votes of the people who DO vote.

The primaries are the key. Support the people who will oppose these issues.

But as we saw with Bernie, the support has to be undeniable and actionable, or they’ll just put in who they want anyway. This means that there is a non-zero chance that we’ll end up with the usual kind of choices. Should we then support the candidate that isn’t at least actively disparaging the law, or should we not vote and increase the chance of the party that is actively destroying things winning?

That doesn’t answer my question. Who should we vote for that doesn’t result in the fascists staying in office?

Who should we vote for otherwise? Every other option leads to Republicans staying in power, and they are the ones actually doing it.

Don’t vote? That’s fewer votes the Republicans need to win, so they stay in power.

Vote third party? That splits the opposition vote, and Republicans stay in power.

And no, neither of those choices “teach the Democrats a lesson.” It just drives them to go to the people who do vote, who are more right wing, so it drives everything further right.

You want a more left wing party? Show them that the left votes and our votes have value.

If a person doesn’t have any issues, then is it actually a problem they need to read up on and disable? Why is there any fault to be had at all in that case? Assuming everyone’s use case is the same is also not an educated opinion.

If individuals start having problems, the tools to fix them are there and it’s on the individual to use them. If large swaths of the user base start having problems, that’s Mozilla’s issue to fix. Right now, any prediction of which way this goes is just a guess.

But still the opposition party. Gotta work with the tools you have.

Iirc, you can with Pro, but not with home.

ChatGPT and other LLMs allow the manipulation to exist in an unprecedented volume. When you have actual people making posts, there are limits on how fast a person can make them and high costs to hire more people which limit resources. LLMs let you make a script and crank out thousand of posts in minutes, each unique and able to bypass spam filters more easily.

I mean, sure, but there was never anything stopping them from doing this in the first place except public pressure. Large companies changing tracks due to public demand is a good thing, and definitely a win.

I think its better to simply realize that a win doesn’t mean the fight is over. It’s okay to be happy about a success. Just don’t let up on the pressure.

deleted by creator

That does come with the unavoidable side effect that the majority of the people will simply not participate. It then follows that sites like Reddit will continue to be the place where the majority of the people will go.

If your goal is to participate in small communities and you are okay with the slow pace of those communities, then that’s fine. If your goal is to move people away from corporate-sponsored media for whatever reason, then this won’t work.

I believe the intent is to use appdata for user-specific configs and programdata for system-wide configs.

Both the student loans and the ACA were actively gutted by Republicans, so they are a perfect example of why getting Republicans out is beneficial to you. You want student loan forgiveness? Get rid of the Republicans that are blocking it. You want single-payer or socialized medicine? Get rid of the Republicans that are blocking it. Both have been introduced by Democrats, both were voted on along party lines and failed due to Republicans.

You are missing my point: you are only hurting yourself and your goals with that strategy. Voting third party only helps Republicans and isn’t seen as any kind of protest by anyone who matters. No one says you have to LIKE voting for either of the parties, but only one party is closer to your goals, is actively trying to achieve your goals, and has a chance of actually getting elected so your goals can be achieved.

Why engage with people you don’t agree with? Because they will get you closer to what you want. What you want is voting reform, so vote for the people who are pushing for voter reform:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/3313/text

https://www.congress.gov/bill/118th-congress/senate-bill/5048

https://raskin.house.gov/2024/9/raskin-beyer-welch-bill-would-bring-ranked-choice-voting-to-congressional-elections-across-america

And not just federally, but locally as well:

https://fairvote.org/ranked-choice-voting-legislation/

It’s no coincidence that these bills are being introduced by Democrats. If you want these bills passed, they also need support to get them passed. As long as the house and senate are split between the Democrats and Republicans, these bills will not get passed. Simple as.

I’m not saying that voting Democrat will make them reverse course. I’m saying that voting Democrat so they have enough control to get these bills passed will let them complete the course they are already on so that you can get what you want.

And what happens in the mean time? Third parties almost always take votes from the Democrats. (That is to say, most of the people who vote third party would have voted Democrat if the third party was not on the ballot.) This gives a huge advantage to the Republican party on close elections. The result is further entrenching of the party that has the larger vested interest in not reforming the system. As a result, any generational movement has no chance of succeeding because the party that directly opposes their goal is always in power.

(To expand: since Democrats lose votes to third parties, they are the ones who would greatly benefit from any kind of ranked choice voting, so they tend to support such reforms. Since Republicans benefit more from FPTP, they tend to oppose such reforms.)

It’s all well and good to send a message, but that message will be received by the people who benefit most by ignoring that message.

The better method is to get people in power now who support election reform, get those reforms passed, then third party candidates become viable.