Lets back up the truck a little.

Sounds like a cool idea, why don’t you set it up?

This sarcastic little witticism required a sarcastic and witty response, which I provided.

Obviously I’m not going to set it up because, as I said in my earlier comments it’s a dreamy idea. I could go on to say, in the absence of such a technological solution, archive.org should still refrain from copyright infringement because they quite obviously aren’t viable with their current stance.

you’re licking the boots of record companies

You’ll have to help me understand how this is so. In my comments I laid out a plan to maintain archive.org’s data for no (or very little) cost or effort, while ensuring that those record company’s receive nothing.

For users, the value of archive.org is the data. However, that data has no value to litigators nor anyone else. You can literally let the existing organisation collapse, and take the data to form a new organisation.

If you want to interpret this plan as doing “nothing at all” then you’re free to do so.

However, and forgive me this final sarcasm, doing nothing at all would be more productive than a change.org petition.

Because I’m not facing a $700m legal claim with a change.org petition as my best defence.

That limits and gatekeeps access

Not necessarily, I wasn’t really proposing to just torrent everything. I was kinda dreaming of a more creative solution that trivialises access while abstracts the actual hosting away from individuals.

this kind of rights violation precisely needs to be normalized

Perhaps, but if so this just isn’t the way to achieve that. IA doesn’t seem sustainable.

Amazing. Pack it up everyone. Looks like the old “are we alone” question has been settled once and for all.

That’s so pathetic.

When i saw the headlines I skipped past. Usually they detect “organic molecules”. This means the requisites for life are present but it’s not evidence of life.

There must be a lot of complicated aspects to this that I don’t understand.

The right course of action seems obvious to me…

Firstly spin out a separate organisation to manage the wayback machine. It shouldn’t be part of the pot defending against litigation like this.

Secondly, and I feel silly saying this but… don’t institutionalise the perpetration of rights violations? In the age of distributed databases and the dark web and the block chain and federation surely we can figure out a way to archive media that doesn’t put people or organisations at risk of litigation.

Finally, if the individuals involved with IA are not liable for the debts of IA then the organisation should fold because that’s practically free compared to defending against these litigious assholes.

It’s not even a fact.

Conservatives could say the same thing.

Today I have…

• spoken to a team member under my supervision about their workflow (30m)
• reviewed applicants for a role on my team (15m)
• prepared some financial reports for a client (1h)
• prepared some financial forms for that client (1h)
• figured out the right methodology for a complex letter for that client (30m)
• drafted a complex financial / legal letter for that client (1h)
• felt stressed about this client’s situation (45m)
• applied a check list to this client’s project (30m)
• reviewed and attended to some emails (30m)

It’s time for lunch now.

I don’t think that at all. Living in the 4th or 5th century is not at all apologies to the 21st.

People will notice everything being more expensive. Facebook memes will tell them why that is so.

Pretty much me.

I’ve been daily driving debian for many years. I’m very comfortable here.

In 2025 with docker containers and flatpaks the benefits of an atomic OS don’t feel very compelling.

This is a long way off, at least in Australia. Probably not for any good reason though.

Any time you propose some sort of citizen ID number scheme nutters start talking about “the mark of the beast”. It’s a biblical thing in which someone envisaged a dystopia in which everyone had an identifying mark on their forehead.

In Australia for example there was a lot of resistance to everyone being assigned a tax id number in the 80s. The law is still structured around this cultural anxiety to this day. For example, you can’t be forced by law to provide your tax id number, and every different government agency will assign you their own number.

Biometrics have their own problems. An iris scan or finger print might be ok, but I would be extraordinarily reluctant to provide my DNA to anyone under any circumstances.

Yeah I don’t really understand this claim.

My partner and I disagree on a lot of things, but I can predict with near certainty where she stands on things because she my partner, we have shared a life together, and I know her.

Most people just aren’t equipped to decide how much someone else should earn. Firstly they might be unable to be objective about people they know. Secondly they don’t have the appropriate skills and experience to evaluate someone’s performance.

Due to the first issue, that would make the whole thing a popularity contest. You’d pretty much have to “campaign” to ensure everyone liked you. Who cares about productivity when all that really matters is that everyone likes you.

Instead of voting for someone’s salary, key personnel are evaluated by asking stakeholders to score them on whatever metrics. Stakeholders should include staff and clients and suppliers, et cetera.

Based on their performance you can determine an appropriate bonus.

I have young kids. This shit terrifies me honestly.

I can’t help but wonder what Dad’s take on this situation was.

Garcia is not an illegal immigrant?

I’m sorry that she lost her daughter but… this is not the way. Imagine feeding her pain and hatred for that photo OP.

Isn’t it her daughter that died?

Yeah I daily drive debian stable.

With flatpaks and docker I never run into problems with my applications being too old or whatever.

Van Hollen went to El Salvador to visit Garcia but was initially denied access.

Reuters published this article, the subject of this post, saying as much. There are no pictures of Garcia in this article.

My comment, that you originally responded to, was posted with reference to this article, before anything else happened.

A few hours later Van Hollen was allowed to interview Garcia. Various news outlets have published articles about that meeting and those articles include photos of Van Hollen meeting with Garcia.