Well, you can disable window controls in gnome and KDE afaik if you want. Then you’ll only have the various app-specific buttons that are necessary for functionality.

If you’re looking for every app to have a vim-like interface or something, well, that seems a bit unrelated to CSDs.

Honestly, I don’t really understand the hate that client-side decorations get. I find that they’re generally pretty useful and good.

I think a lot of it comes from people who want to ‘rice’ and theme their desktops but I personally think that dream has sailed. The kind of theming people want on Linux systems is simply not possible without massive amounts of work and downgrades to accessibility, security and usability.

Maybe I’m misunderstanding but for clarification, the fact they’re drawn by the client actually means they can always be the same across different environments. This is in opposition to server-side decorations which are drawn by the desktop environment and should match the environment as a result. That said, server-side decorations are largely much less extensible than client side ones.

Right, I might’ve been more confused with your previous to last paragraph because using she/her pronoun as ‘default’ was and is a genuine feminist practice in French where gender neutrality is more difficult.

Anyhow, I would recommend not arguing your points like that - it just kinda smells like bad faith argumentation.

By calling reverse discrimination a far-right trope, I presume you mean complaints about reverse discrimination?

Yes, that would be correct. It’s the basis of the Great replacement theory.

announcement reasoning

…no it wasn’t?

Your last two paragraphs, especially the last one, feel eerily close to reverse-ism.

“Reverse-ism” usually refers to “reverse discrimination”. It’s a big trope in far-right circles and ties directly to the “Great replacement” theory.

It’s unclear what your intentions were when you said this but it felt weird.

It’s worth understanding that “agenda” has a negative connotation. In this context, it’s used as a dogwhistle against women and queer people.

Because they hate/don’t want to learn rust and think Java is a superior language

You know, that’s not what I’ve read. It’s worth mentioning that it doesn’t just use Java.

Don’t call people “incredibly fucking stupid”. Be(e) nice.

This reads eerily close to reverse-ism. Please don’t do that.

I explicitly chose that term because it’s not considered subjective by anyone, but especially not by the people who think gender-neutrality is somehow NOT political.

All words are subjective. “Non-technical” is not really the magic word you think it is. Could you clearly define it? I can’t personally.

Do you think they’d stop being bad people if they couldn’t make an honest living? Would it be better or worse if they were on the street? Do you think they might resort to criminality also?

I don’t think anyone deserves living in the street. I don’t think they will stop being bad people whether or not I support them. It seems you’re trying to move the goal post.

Do you feel better knowing they aren’t getting your money? Even at the cost of them ever doing anything good for anyone?

I feel better that they aren’t getting my money because they cannot be empowered to hurt the people I care about. I think they can do good things without my support. This seems like a weird thing to say.

Also, this is clearly sealioning. It’s really not a good way to make conversation.

I mean, to be fair, Skia appears to be good - Firefox and LibreOffice also use it for example. I believe GNOME Web will also use Skia in GNOME 47. It certainly seems that people are moving away from Cairo and into Skia. For what reason? I don’t know.

I don’t support bad people. Those bad people can change and become good people. Until then, why would I support and pay those that hurt my friends?

What I got was that there would be no Google or Mozilla specific code/libraries, but FOSS libraries for common media formats would be included so that the project can reach a wider audience.

AFAIK They use Skia, the rendering library made by Google so this does not appear true either.

We should be promoting open source software and not have infighting when open source software doesn’t have much mass market appeal to begin with.

Just as a side note, I want open source software / free software to have appeal because it is good for people. If the way the promote it to the masses is enabling awful people, I’m really not interested anymore.

Sometimes terrible people can do good things. Those good things should be supported. Judge a project on it own merits.

The thing here is that Ladybird and SerenityOS are both the community and the code. One cannot live without the other because the code will always need its community to develop it. And in this case, it is not possible to support them without supporting the people who, y’know receive the money. I think nobody is arguing against an independent browser engine - the argument is against the implementation of it.

Based on the content of the linked post and the evolution of the thread here, the mod team has decided to lock this post. There is an important difference between standing up for people who are marginalized and harassment, which this thread has been more or less equating. Please deal with this topic in a more nuanced manner going forward.

Bitcoin is the same speed it’s always been. Blocks happen every 10 minutes. Pay a high fee? Get in on the next block. Want to save on fees? Maybe it takes a few blocks for your transaction to go through.

This is a fancy way to say that it is slower unless you pay higher fees.

Fees are much, much lower than credit card, paypal, or other similar competitors. You could send a billion dollars in a single transaction and pay $1.50 on main chain, or you could send $5 on lightning and pay <1c in fees. Lightning has been around for 5 years now, it works, I use it regularly.

The fees are fluctuating and can be much higher than you claim (https://decrypt.co/234446/bitcoin-fees-skyrocket-okx-exchange-burning-utxo)

While it is true you could pay lower fees if you send larger amounts, if we take your 5$ fee at face value, then any transaction below 147.35$ will have lower fees on a payment service like Stripe (3.4% for international transactions + 0.30$ per transaction).

The supply of Bitcoin, 21 million coins, is known and has always been known. It can’t be diluted beyond that point.

I did not claim otherwise.

Nobody owns 51% of the network. Even such an actor can’t print extra BTC or force money to move without the appropriate private key. The best they can do is temporarily delay transactions while burning north of a trillion dollars in energy and equipment doing so. Which is why nobody has ever done it.

Nobody currently does. However, it is my understanding that theu could fork the network and update it if they had 50%+1 of the network. It is not impossible.

Given that fees have continued to increase with time, this seems like not a problem. It’s not “dangerous”, it’s part of the design. If hashrate drops, it drops, but given that fees and hashrate have continued to grow despite continually minting less coins, it’s not really a problem.

It is a problem because people do not want to pay higher fees.

Anybody can have a cash wallet without disclosing their identity, yet they still pay taxes.

They can pay taxes but they don’t have to. There is no system to know the identity and know the tax rate that should be applied using the raw bitcoin transaction method. This has to be applied using an external centralized service at best.

Bitcoin’s rules prevent the kind of fraud where the value of your money is printed away via supply inflation of central banks or “currency restructuring” on the global scale by the the world bank.

This is not fraud and it is not what I’m talking about.

People pay taxes because they think it’s the right thing to do and/or because the government has guns and makes them. Either way, if you run a company, if you are providing goods and services, you have a place you can send somebody with a gun and enforce those rules. All the companies currently paying taxes would keep paying taxes if they used Bitcoin.

The tax and identity layers have to be added on top. They are not built-in. While it is true a country can force things, it is not true they can force the bitcoin network to apply these rules. This is in fact one of the selling points of Bitcoin according to this video.

This video has seemingly no sources for its claims.

Here are some facts:

• Lyn Alden is part of “Ego Death Capital”, a venture capital company around cryptocurrencies (https://egodeath.capital/team).
• Lyn Alden is the Board Director of Swan Bitcoin - a Bitcoin investment platform (https://www.swanbitcoin.com/alden/)
• Lyn Alden is not an economist (https://www.lynalden.com/about-lyn-alden/)

Here are some weird claims it makes:

• Bitcoin transactions happen at the “speed of light” (~27:00) REALITY CHECK: As Bitcoin has grown, transactions have become slow. It’s in fact why many people do not accept it for purchases anymore.
• Bitcoin cannot be diluted (~27:25) REALITY CHECK: Bitcoin is always being diluted until it reaches its hard limit.
• The value of Bitcoin has only increased over time (~27:50) REALITY CHECK: The log scale is playing tricks. A linear graph would show how volatile Bitcoin has truly been.
• Nobody controls the network (~28:25) REALITY CHECK: If someone were to own 50% or more of the network’s compute power, they could control the network.

Here are some things it omits:

• Bitcoin transaction fees (~28:15): Transaction fees that empower miners have also made it much less usable as a currency. The transactions fees for Bitcoin are so high that credit card fees are actually more reasonable.
• Bitcoin’s hard limit is likely very dangerous for the network (~29:00): Once the hard limit is reached, it is unclear if people will keep pumping computing power at it. If the creation of new Bitcoin is no longer allowed, it is possible that transaction fees will need to be raised to compensate miners.
• Bitcoin’s lack of rules allow for massive amounts of fraud and prevents effective taxation (~29:25): While the video paints a cute picture of financial freedom, the reality is that Bitcoin allows for fraud on a world scale and does not allow for sales tax because of the way that anyone can have a cryptocurrency wallet without disclosing their identity.

Genuinely, this is Bitcoin propaganda.