Nano is fine. But Micro is a worthwhile upgrade: https://micro-editor.github.io/

There are quite a few in !buyeuropean@feddit.uk

OP wants to store all of their porn collection in RAM

It’s easy to gamble if money isn’t yours.

To my knowledge Musk is gambling with his own money, not hedge fund capital or something.

If your day to day survival depends on every dollar, then you don’t have the freedom to dick around with investments.

But, yes, this is correct. If you’re extremely wealthy then you can keep gambling. If you fail you still have a million other chances. So you’re kind of guaranteed to succeed eventually.

Whereas the common person has one chance. If they fail that’s it.

In fairness he was able to recognise which companies to buy

I think this is just survivorship bias. There are millions of wealthy individuals investing in companies every single day. Occasionally these gambles pay off and make people extremely wealthy.

Most of the time the people who succeed just spend their incredibe wealth and live a quiet happy life.

But there are others who crave attention. These individuals bully their way into prestigious positions and pretend that they’re leading the company.

Elon is that kind of person. He started wealthy, bet his money on companies that succeeded. Then took the CEO role so he would get credit for the companys’ successes.

If ever people dare stop paying attention to him he’ll do something drastic to recapture the spotlight on.

He’s the kind of person who will stand on stage and do a nazi salute just because he wants you to look at him.

I did.

I also read a fair chunk of the article you linked and it didn’t change my view.

I disagree that employers fear litigation. Is there something else I missed?

It is very much true

From the link you provided:

This may come as a surprise to some: it is only after two years of continued service that employees have the right to request written reasons for their dismissal.

Employers don’t need to provide a reason for your dismissal.

There are some exceptions but they’re very specific and unlikely to relevant. If an employer wants rid of you they can do so at their whim.

Even if you think you have a case, good luck finding a solicitor who will take on your case. They simply won’t be interested because it’s not easy to win without the rights you get after 2 years employment.

I live in the UK where it’s practically impossible to get fired.

In the UK you only get employment protections after working at a company for two years. Up until then you can be fired without reason

Well, the latest development I’ve seen is they’re deleting (censoring) comments calling out the political bias of their CEO on their post about how they’re fighting against censorship:

https://www.reddit.com/r/ProtonVPN/comments/1ij4qn9/behind_the_scenes_of_proton_vpns_fight_against/

Here’s an evidenced account of part of what their CEO asserted:

This is what the CEO posting as u/Proton_Team stated in a response on r/ProtonMail:

Here is our official response, also available on the Mastodon post in the screenshot:

Corporate capture of Dems is real. In 2022, we campaigned extensively in the US for anti-trust legislation.

Two bills were ready, with bipartisan support. Chuck Schumer (who coincidently has two daughters working as big tech lobbyists) refused to bring the bills for a vote.

At a 2024 event covering antitrust remedies, out of all the invited senators, just a single one showed up - JD Vance.

By working on the front lines of many policy issues, we have seen the shift between Dems and Republicans over the past decade first hand.

Dems had a choice between the progressive wing (Bernie Sanders, etc), versus corporate Dems, but in the end money won and constituents lost.

Until corporate Dems are thrown out, the reality is that Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses.

Source: https://archive.ph/quYyb

To call out the important bits:

1. He refers to it as the “official response”
2. Indicates that JD Vance is on their side just because he attended an event that other invited senators didn’t
3. Rattles on about “corporate Dems” with incredible bias
4. States “Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses” which is immediately refuted by every response

That was posted in ther/ProtonMail sub where the majority of the event took place: https://old.reddit.com/r/ProtonMail/comments/1i1zjgn/so_that_happened/m7ahrlm/

However be aware that the CEO posting as u/Proton_Team kept editing his comments so I wouldn’t trust the current state of it. Plus the proton team/subreddit mods deleted a ton of discussion they didn’t like. Therefore this archive link captured the day after might show more but not all: https://web.archive.org/web/20250116060727/https://old.reddit.com/r/ProtonMail/comments/1i1zjgn/so_that_happened/m7ahrlm/

Some statements were made on Mastodon but these are subsequently deleted, but they’re capture by an archive link: https://web.archive.org/web/20250115165213/https://mastodon.social/@protonprivacy/113833073219145503

I learned about it from an r/privacy thread but true to their reputation the mods there also went on a deletion spree and removed the entire post: https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/1i210jg/protonmail_supporting_the_party_that_killed/

This archive link might show more but I’ve not checked: https://web.archive.org/web/20250115193443/https://old.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/1i210jg/protonmail_supporting_the_party_that_killed/

There’s also this lemmy discussion from the day after but by that point the Proton team had fully kicked in their censorship so I don’t know how much people were aware of (apologies I don’t know how to make a generic lemmy link) https://feddit.uk/post/22741653

Can you share more info about it? Why did you choose it, any pros or cons? It’s the first time I’ve heard of it.

How apt, just yesterday I put together an evidenced summary of the CEOs recent absurd comments. Why are Proton so keen to throw away so much good will people had invested in them?!

This is what the CEO posting as u/Proton_Team stated in a response on r/ProtonMail:

Here is our official response, also available on the Mastodon post in the screenshot:

Corporate capture of Dems is real. In 2022, we campaigned extensively in the US for anti-trust legislation.

Two bills were ready, with bipartisan support. Chuck Schumer (who coincidently has two daughters working as big tech lobbyists) refused to bring the bills for a vote.

At a 2024 event covering antitrust remedies, out of all the invited senators, just a single one showed up - JD Vance.

By working on the front lines of many policy issues, we have seen the shift between Dems and Republicans over the past decade first hand.

Dems had a choice between the progressive wing (Bernie Sanders, etc), versus corporate Dems, but in the end money won and constituents lost.

Until corporate Dems are thrown out, the reality is that Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses.

Source: https://archive.ph/quYyb

To call out the important bits:

1. He refers to it as the “official response”
2. Indicates that JD Vance is on their side just because he attended an event that other invited senators didn’t
3. Rattles on about “corporate Dems” with incredible bias
4. States “Republicans remain more likely to tackle Big Tech abuses” which is immediately refuted by every response

That was posted in ther/ProtonMail sub where the majority of the event took place: https://old.reddit.com/r/ProtonMail/comments/1i1zjgn/so_that_happened/m7ahrlm/

However be aware that the CEO posting as u/Proton_Team kept editing his comments so I wouldn’t trust the current state of it. Plus the proton team/subreddit mods deleted a ton of discussion they didn’t like. Therefore this archive link captured the day after might show more but not all: https://web.archive.org/web/20250116060727/https://old.reddit.com/r/ProtonMail/comments/1i1zjgn/so_that_happened/m7ahrlm/

Some statements were made on Mastodon but these are subsequently deleted, but they’re capture by an archive link: https://web.archive.org/web/20250115165213/https://mastodon.social/@protonprivacy/113833073219145503

I learned about it from an r/privacy thread but true to their reputation the mods there also went on a deletion spree and removed the entire post: https://www.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/1i210jg/protonmail_supporting_the_party_that_killed/

This archive link might show more but I’ve not checked: https://web.archive.org/web/20250115193443/https://old.reddit.com/r/privacy/comments/1i210jg/protonmail_supporting_the_party_that_killed/

There’s also this lemmy discussion from the day after but by that point the Proton team had fully kicked in their censorship so I don’t know how much people were aware of (apologies I don’t know how to make a generic lemmy link) https://feddit.uk/post/22741653

I don’t think you even need to configure the email.

If I recall correctly emails are optional for Let’s Encrypt but Caddy are partnered with ZeroSSL who do require emails so you’re encouraged to provide one.

For an internal project that’s fine, and under semantic versioning you can basically break anything you like before v1.0.0 so it’s probably valid

Date based version numbers is just lazy. There’s nothing more significant about a release in two weeks (2025.x.y) than today (2024.x.y).

At least with pride versioning there’s some logic to it.

I think is the logic used for Linux kernel versioning so you’re in good company.

But everyone should really follow semantic versioning. It makes life so much easier.

Indeed, that’s why I use the AGPL license. Corporations hate it because it forces them to give back.

That’s actually pretty reasonable. I’d be happy to make my open source projects compliant for a company - but they can damn well pay me for the effort.

What a terribly written article. I got half way through and just gave up.

This thread might be the fastest I’ve ever seen discussion devolve from “that could be interesting” to just incomprehensible screaming.

Because developing a tool solely for a roundtrip test is probably a waste of time. Perhaps it’s an easier exercise than I think but I would have thought you could manually test it far quicker and more thoroughly than by automating the process