And blocked

What’s new:

• edit PDFs
• new privacy protections
• tab group previews
• dropped support for 32-bit linux

And honestly I’d stop there and say “and more”

Also, the summary of the release notes is not the release notes. You cared about every dot point in those release notes equally? There are no larger broad changes?

Why post it here? I personally don’t think every Firefox release is interesting enough to post to the !technology@lemmy.world channel so when a release is interesting enough to post here I figure there are reasons and that they are easy to note along with the URL.

I suspect most people have some feelings are the same because I suspect most people would be unimpressed if the channel included every minor release of everyone’s torch apps. The exact reasons something is interesting varies for people. For some people anything Firefox might be enough. For others it might only be interesting when they do something big like trying to come up with a new solution for tracking ads. Since its a community, I kind of think a good post needs to include the highlights of what is meant to be interesting to help out the others in the community, especially if they might not naturally see the same things as interesting

The Firefox browser itself tells me there is an update. An update could be interesting to read about here and if so I think it makes sense to make the case with the highlights. Like, why did you find it interesting enough to put here?

Personally, I’m pretty inclined to downvote any post that is a link without a short summary or context. I appreciate that’s not everyone.

And personally I think it’s important to say why you downvote. The poster can choose what to do with that information and I’ve got no expectations for them to change how they do things

Downvoted for not giving any sort of summary of the larger features and fixes

4.5-4.6 can be hit-or-miss

How is that not inflated? For my personal ratings, a three is something I’d be happy to eat every day. A five is close to unattainable. It’s basically centered on 2.5 with something like a tapered normal distribution. It’s tedious mapping out so I’m not lowering ratings for good places so I don’t rate anymore.

But getting past me being difficult, you can’t even rate 4.5 can you? Isn’t that information being lost when the way people rate is basically 5 for thumb up and every other number is a thumb down?

You’re right about it being useful to look at relative ratings, I just wouldn’t label that as really accurate.

It’s a separate issue but you brought up categories. I never loved rating in a situation like on Airbnb where one place might be a deliberately expensive penthouse and another might be deliberately a cheap shared room in the wilderness, especially with something like a “cleanliness” rating

Agreed Google maps is the best review aggregator (and I wish it wasn’t) but “the star ratings are scarily accurate”? I think you mean “hugely inflated”. Like almost any review system a I’ve seen recently: if you like a place and you give less than a 5 then you’re hurting it.

I think it’s a bubble but I’m also suspicious we’re near peak investment and think it could sustain for a while yet. I wonder what sort of range he’s projecting for the peak and timeframe

They weren’t my instances. There are some public instances floating around so, before trying to self host, I gave them a shot. I can’t remember the specifics well. For me to bother investing time testing, I may have had a query that was irritating me on Duck Duck Go and Google so it might not have been a particularly fair test

For anyone curious how well it works, I just noticed they have a trial:

https://kagi.com/pricing

Every SearXNG instance I’ve tested has been terrible for my test queries. Any chance you can account for that?

They’d be doing an enterprise install but here’s the gitlab readme for the open desk community edition and with links for a Kubernetes installation:

https://gitlab.opencode.de/bmi/opendesk/deployment/opendesk/

Most authoritarian regimes consolidate power through improving the economy and high approval don’t they? I thought the collapse tends to come later after the consolatio and I hadn’t seen it argued as a strategic thing. Any chance you can point to something that discusses this more fully?

deleted by creator

Oh, I don’t have epilepsy so I’m not avoiding YouTube because of this filter, I’m avoiding YouTube because of the money Google keeps giving to Trump and because I noticed that my tech usage isn’t very diversified and it was pretty pretty dominated by US companies (so if you imagine trade war negotiating leverage, I was giving the Trump administration more leverage). From that perspective, it removes ad revenue which is about all you can do with YouTube besides trying to convince creators to put their videos on multiple platforms (and it’s questionable there is a good alternative platform)

Let’s run with this. What are some political examples of “left”?

To be fair, I think the words liberal, left and capitalism all have different meanings to different groups. And sometimes I think they subtly change meanings while someone is making a single logical point.

What do you mean specifically here?

That a lot of political groups that align themselves as liberals are also in favour of free trade? It reads as if you are also characterising capitalism as a negative so I’m presuming it’s something like enabling the rich and powerful to maximise profits with minimal oversight. Since you are only relating capitalism to liberals I think you’re referring to the far-right rhetoric that they will stop this “capitalism” but ignoring that most traditional political groups thought of as conservative are also pro free trade, and ignoring that these far-right groups haven’t (I would argue) taken any/many actions that target stoping this “capitalism” (for example Trumps tariffs are practically for demanding concessions from other countries and you can see this because their unstable values hurt local industries but help pushing for demands).

Or maybe you simply mean that the left as you use the label is focused on civil liberties without being tied to systems of economics?

I’m sure you have plenty to say about what I wrote but can you lead with how I was wrong with my assumptions about what you meant?

No worries. I edited my reply to put both words on the same sentence to help if that was the issue.

I did wonder about this a bit though. He is often framed in media as far right but unlike Trump or Farage he doesn’t seem to be so loud with anti-immigrant statements in the same sort of demonising way. Eventually I found this and I’m curious how wrong or right you think it is:

https://www.swp-berlin.org/10.18449/2024C37/

Here’s some (biased) quotes that I think make it seem like the far right label is reasonable but I’m sill pretty ignorant myself (and sorry that the vocabulary is different, it was a pain for me so I’m guessing it’s not perfect for you):

Milei cultivates a populist political style and espouses a libertarian-authoritarian ideology that is on the far right of the national political spectrum. His success as a politician can be attributed to a mix of national and international factors: He is both a product of the supply and demand within his country’s political arena and a part of the rising global radical right.

Milei is a proponent of anarcho-capitalism, which was founded in the 1950s in the U.S. by Murray Rothbard. In the early 1990s, Rothbard argued that libertarian ideas needed an active and aggressive strategy to gain majority support in the U.S. and be politically viable. He, therefore, advocated right-wing populism, the programmatic core of which is at the heart of Milei’s dis­course. Rothbard proposed an “outreach strategy” in which libertarians would ally themselves with paleoconservatives and traditionalists while making certain ideo­logical compromises, such as adopting a socially conservative agenda – an ideological shift that is visible in Milei’s discourse development. According to Rothbard, this new broad right-wing populist movement should be led by a charismatic presidential candidate whom all right-wing anti-estab­lish­ment forces would enthusiastically support.

In typical populist style, Milei blames “the caste”, as he calls the political elite, for all of Argentina’s ills, describing its mem­bers are “parasites” that feed off the coun­try’s wealth. He claims to despise politics, regarding it as a “dirty business”. Milei does not acknowledge the factual inequality among people due to the double contingency of social origin and the personal talent con­ditioned by it. Instead, he assumes a theo­retical equality of origin, which should not be confused with equality of value. Thus, Milei views political and legal systems not as enabling frameworks that include equali­sation mechanisms such as rules to prevent oligopolies, but merely as constraints on the free development of individuals and the market. In this regard, he sees redistribution as a source of injustice. Consequently, he categorically rejects approaches to af­firma­tive action or positive discrimination, the protection of minorities and social policy.

Milei’s ultra-liberal stance, evident in his advocacy for allowing the sale of one’s own organs under market conditions (“My first property is my body; why shouldn’t I be able to dispose of it?”), quickly reaches its limits when it comes to the self-deter­mina­tion of pregnant individuals. Together with his vice-president, Victoria Villarruel, he campaigns for the repeal of the legalisation of abortion approved by Congress in 2020. Milei considers abortion to be “murder between relatives”, which should be subject to particularly severe punishment.

Milei believes that the lack of gender equality is an invention of the left

Milei tends to relativise the crimes committed by the Argentine military dictatorship (1976–1983). He admits that there were excesses in the “war against subversion”; however, he denies the systematic nature of the human rights violations committed (kidnappings, torture, assassinations, and disappearances)

But Milei’s mission is backward-looking. According to the 2023 electoral programme, the declared aim of his LLA alliance is to use liberal policies to return Argentina to the economically, politically, culturally and socially prosperous country it was supposedly (as the first world power) at the begin­ning of the 20th century – a time, inciden­tally, when universal and secret suffrage did not yet exist. This topos of a glorified past, which is reminiscent of the “Make America Great Again” sentiment, is central to Milei’s rhetoric and typically characterises the radical right

It’s tough to imagine a liberal standing with Trump on stage making theatrics like he does.

At the very least he’s populist. And his views for a smaller government go beyond being fiscally conservative. A libertarian seems like a reasonable label but that’s different than a liberal. Why would you say he’s liberal?