Because often it is a nightmare to evict a tenant that do not pay the rent.
I can speak for where I live where a lot of people gone to the short-rental way exactly because that way they have the certainty that when they want the house back, for every reason, they have it.
To me AirBnB is not the problem, it is the wrong solution to a real problem.
What I do not agree about is the implicit assumption that if AIRBNB is banned then every house that was used for short-term rental would become available on the long-term rental market.
The main advantage of the short-term rental (obvious higher profits aside) is the fact that the owner is sure to be able to get back the house if/when he need it. So many owners saw the possibility to use an house with AirBnB (or other similar ways) a lot more attractive than keeping it empty (paying the taxes on it) and much less risky than having a long-term rental where the tenants could be turn out to be a bad one.
After reversing its position on remote work, Dell is reportedly implementing new tracking techniques on May 13 to ensure its workers are following the company's return-to-office (RTO) policy, The Register reported today, citing anonymous sources....
As far as I remember, the mayor was arrested because he colluted with mafia and stole the money needed for the migrants, but feel free to keep your narrative
Probably the request to Proton arrived from a Swiss judge, who received a request from Spanish judge, and he evaluated the request and decided that it has merit.
Never tried to force the closing of your trunk lid because there is a bag that is slightly over the limit and you need a little more pressure, even if the bag is a little pressed down ?
The assumption here is that if it is your finger which is in the way, you take it out the way and you are not that stupid to try to close it again if for some reason you are not able move it away, which to me seems to make a lot of sense.
What person with an automated cargo door closure mechanism has thought “stop protecting my stuff and just fucking close”?
The same person that sometime need to force the door to close because even if his things are in the way, he know there will not be damages, just a bag a little more pressed. Or some more trashed trash you are taking to the landfill
I’ll admit it annoys me when there’s something in the way that keeps my door from latching and it reopens, but I’d rather have to clear the door and shut it manually than it force itself closed and jams the door or break my shit.
Which is what the system assume in this case. It stops 3 times, the 4th it suppose that the human know what he is doing.
But let's face it: if the car lid would never close if something is in the way, some other dumb youtuber would have made a video about it and here there would be a discussion about how stupid are the engineers to not let the lid close even if a bag in slightly on on the way and the user know what they are doing.
You’re missing the point of a safety feature. The car shouldn’t, by itself, close the lid if something’s in the way. It should allow the user to push it down, or disable it temporarily, to do so.
I get the safety feature. The point is that here I am saying to the car to close the lid even if something is in the way. I made a conscious decision to do so, and more than one time, so I expect the car to do it. But I agree that it could have been designed in a better way.
The point of a safety feature in any system is to prevent unexpected situation from having unexpected consequences, not to be a magic solution that accommodate for brainless people. In one direction, you can make the judgement call and force the thing down, in the other direction you lose a finger.
Which is exactly what happened here. He made the judgement call to ignore the safety feature (and probably ignored how the feature works)
Buy a book published more that a couple of years ago. Or ask the people living in the area (the older the better, normally ). Or ask the people living in the area where you can have the mushrooms checked, they usually know where to go.
[Thread, post or comment was deleted by the author]
He is not wrong though.
Number aside, if you have a hard requirement that in a committee board there should be someone from a minority then you will end in a situation where the committee perform worse because the "forced" member has no merit to be in, or at least it is an very high probability.
Others have replied pointing out this is a strawman and that merit doesn’t make any sense as a metric if you have discrimination.
So remove discrimination. Put in the CoC that any information about gender, race, religion and so on must not be disclosed since it is not relevant to the quality of the code/work you submit. Then you have merit only.
I really find stupid that someone really think that his contribution must be accepted just because he is from a minority, irregardless the quality.
I think people like you really don't understand what OSS software is.
What you don't understand is that OSS let you do what you want with the software I (an possibly others) created but not let you to dictate to me how I must run the project or what direction the project need to go.
We can discuss of course, and maybe sometimes I agree with you and sometimes not (and the contrary) but in the end I am the maintainer so I have the last word.
So no, if I create an OSS project and have a vision for it, if you don't agree I am fully entaitled to say "ok, just make your own, fork mine if you like" to you.
I think the easy answer to that is “because it is not as trivial as forking a small app that could run off of a git repo”, it’s a whole operating system involving a lot of infrastructure and a huge community around it.
This It's just an excuse. If the authors of the open letter are active developers and reflect what the majority of the community thinks then they already have the infrastructure (or big part of it, else how the fuck they work ?) and the community behing them. Man, it would not be the first time a distro to be forked.
You say remove discrimination and then use a discriminatory strawman.
Why ? Because I basically say "keep these personal informations for yourself since they are not needed while developing" ?
No one is suggesting a code contribution must be accepted based on a minority status.
But they are saying that a board member should be elected based on the fact that he came from a minority, which is as wrong as asking that a code contribution should be accepted based on the minority status.
They are saying that to get a decent functioning community for everyone you need a diverse range of people in positions that set the behaviour of the community.
Agree on this. My point though is that the people in these positions need to be there for the merit and not for a status.
You can’t get the CoC and enforcement of it right unless those affected are in positions that influence it.
Nope. You can enforce a CoC if the ones delegated to enforce it are acknowledged as authoritative people and there is a clear path to do it. If you put a person in charge to enforce the code "just becasue [insert your favorite minority reason]" you end in the same place: the CoC will be selectively enforced only on a certain group of people.
Your enforced anonymity doesn’t work because there are other ways of gendering and racialising people (e.g. based on who people talk).
Assuming you track them outside the project, yes you are right.
Additionally, what you are saying is that minoritised people have to hide who they are so they don’t get discriminated against rather than just deal with those doing the discrimination.
That is what you are saying now, not me.
I said that I don't care about what your identity is but only about the quality of your work, why did you assume that i mean that only the minorities should not disclose these informations ?
Else explain to me why it is relevant that the pull request just created is done by someone from a minority group.
You lose nothing by making sure people from all backgrounds have the same opportunity and enjoyment being part of it.
Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome. I lose something if a board member of the project I contribute is elected only because he is from a minority group because he replace a more knowledgeable member and the average quality of the work decline.
If you aren’t in a minority and don’t care about those that are then just say so!
It is not that I don't care, it is that in certain situation it not pertinent if you are from a minority or not. Software development, particularly OSS where the entry point is really low, is one of this situation: why I should care about the group you are part of when you submit a contribute ? How it is pertinent. Do you want to have a voice in the project ? Earn it by contributing and being better of the ones you think are bad and or toxic. But wanting to have a say in the project "just because" is toxic too.
It’s not about “satisfying the minorities”. It’s about ensuring a basic base level of respect and behaviour for people from all backgrounds.
All true, but here is the point: what you are asking for is to have decent people and not assholes. And to be a decent person has nothing to do with the group you are part of. So as long as you have not the guarantee that someone from a minority cannot be an asshole (which you cannot) you still have the same problem, only with a different target.
So maybe we should start to look at the single person rather then from which group it come from.
It’s really not that hard! If you don’t feel minoritised in your daily life and therefore don’t see the importance, fine, but all of us are only one incident or cultural shift to end up being the target so if you aren’t motivated by the plight of people you are happy to “other” than do so because one day you might be the other.
Honestly, and without any second meaning, I think that there are way more complex reasons than the "we are a minority" on why some minorities are is the position you describe.
where the committee perform worse because the “forced” member
Ah, the common strawman. A committee where everyone thinks pretty much the same is somehow better than one where a few have a different opinion?
Sometime yes, sometime not.
It all depend on the context.
The direction of a project ? Then maybe the fact that the committee has at least roughly the same vision is a good thing, it keep the project focused and progressing, as long as there is a way to offer suggestions.
A political group ? Then it is better to have more points of view, as long as you can decide something in the end.
There is not a single best solution.
Such discussions took place decades ago when pretty much every manager was only male. And they often honestly thought they did the right thing. When there were more women forced to be managers the group as a whole got better insights into different opinions. Which helped to see that certain things could be done a different way.
That to me is history, plus rather logical.
On the other hand I can point to examples where when a woman, to stay within your example, were put in charge the result were disastrous, so what ?
Maybe if we start to think that being in some groups does not inherently make you a better candidate to something than we will start to solve the problem.
Having a few people with different opinions is further usually good for a committee.
As long as they know what they are talking about yes, else it is just stupid.
The point of all this discussion is that Jon Ringer objected to have an hard requirement for one person in the committee need to be from a minority, which honestly is not that stupid thing to say.
I guess it can be simple like that when you are the maintainer. It is definetly not as simple when there are many of them. Of course you can run it like that and many do, but the whole mentality is pretty limited.
Why limited ?. In the end I am pursuing my vision for the project.
Not really about what is the absolute correct answer. Our values are clearly different. More like what I believe works best in the long term.
I just acknowledge that at some point the vision of the author(s) and the vision of the community (or part of it) can differ and that at this point it is better for everyone to follow their vision.
Community building can be done without any coding, coding can be done without any community. However, to build a large project you need them both.
We agree on that.
In a large volunteer project like this, not everything can be worked on. You become selective. We are going to major on this thing, or specifically talk about that project to get community engagement and get the thing done. This drives the project, she helps it to stop chasing hairs. Someone has to decide what feature is going in this release to make it ready to be a release candidate.
That group of people, ultimately making and influencing those decisions, is the CoC.
Nope.
CoC mean "Code of Conduct". It dictates how the interperpersonal relations should be in the community, not the direction the project need to follow. Which means that if you make a request I should not answer with "fuck your request" but with some more appropriate "we have not the manpower/motivation/infrastructure/whatever reason to do it, but feel free to do it yourself and submit it for review" answer (that's of course is a simple example, bear with me in this case) if I am not interested in your request or there are some real limitations.
Let’s take a for-instance: Sign up boxes.
For years, Linux sign up allows you to record random data into your profile, office, phone number, etc. These are text, and can be anything. Now, what if there’s a rising need to add a minicom number(minix, used to be used by the deaf to send messages to an organisation, before email). As a hearing person, this is going to be a low priority for me, so I work on something else. I’ve got spare capacity, so if the project leaders are calling for help on this thing, I can go and help.
True, but if you think that it is the CoC that produce this result, you are way wrong.
What produce this result is that people are willing to work on a feature even if they don't need it and if there is enough request for that feature. If you are the only one person who ask for a feature you will get low priority even if you are deaf (just to keep up with your example).
What do you think you can do if I don't want to work on your feature ? Use the CoC to compel me to do the work ? Do you think you can threaten me with a ban from the project ? Try it and you lose one developer (and probably others).
This, ultimately, builds a better over-all product, but it’s not something I’d have noticed by myself, because I’m not part of the deaf community.
True, but it is simply the fact that the developers lowered the barrier to make a request on one side and on the other side someone made a good and motivated request.
The point is that this has nothing to do with the fact that a deaf person is in a leadership position.
In this case, the merit, the qualification, for being on the CoC is being a member of a section of the community. It brings valuable a viewpoint, and adds a voice at the table that can make a real difference. Most coders know that having a wish list of features at the start can make it infinitely easier to add them, than having to go back an rewrite to make them happen. Having a voice that might need that feature makes a difference
Again, what you are asking for is to have a way to communicate with the developers and possibly a clear way that indicate how a request is handled.
But having a way for the community to communicate with the developers and the leadership of the project is not the same as having a CoC that mandate that the leadership must include members from minorities.
But in the end we are debating about nothing, the project was forked so I suppose that we just need to wait to see how it will end.
I think you are seeing this as racism when it is just some old good skepticism about a country that is famous for faking everything.
Maybe they really done what they say, or maybe it is just some proof of concept that need to be ported, if possible, to a viable product stage or maybe it is just a fake, we will see.
The EU’s Data Protection Board (EDPB) has told large online platforms they should not offer users a binary choice between paying for a service and consenting to their personal data being used to provide targeted advertising....
Maybe nothing in the short term, but it is not that improbable that something will emerge. YT and insta are here just because they were the first, not that it is clear that there is a market (or a use for these kind of services), once you remove the one who don’t follow the laws, other will emerge.
Until the EU don’t use the same tactic: follow the law or get out.
And what Meta is not understanding is that if the EU will arrive at this point, the “follow the law” will be as pedantic as it can be. And maybe even a little more.
Meta should learn from what happened during the Brexit’s negotiations.
Well, the micro-USB and USB-C or the GDPR examples are here. Maybe is a little more difficult with services since it is way faster to change a service then a law.
I think that there are two main reasons that caused them to be fired: insubordination since they occupied the CEO’s office and refused to leave when asked (and probably he don’t asked only one time) which led to the second reason, they were arrested for trespassing in the CEO’s office.
Google warns users of these apps that their experience may deteriorate soon. They may “experience buffering issues” or see errors such as “the following content is not available on this app” when trying to watch videos....
You people really throw logic out the window when you talk about shit like this. You want corporations to make less money? Go fix the fucking tax laws not bitch about average membership fees like a fuckwit.
The problem is not that YT cannot make money, the problem here is that the options are that you can choose if watching video, with or without ads, for free (well, paying with your data) or pay with money and your data to watch videos with ads.
I am not saying I have some god-like right to watch videos for free but on the other hand it seems that at YT they are trying as hard as they can to make me install adblocker to be able to use their service with minimun hassle.
YT, like every other company, is learning that if they don’t care about customers then customers don’t care about them. They are making the false equation “one less user with adblocker == one more user on Premium|without adblocker”, which is obviously false. And they are forgetting that they have a lot of more or less direct competition.
They care. Problem is that they care only to be able to make more money. They are simply trying to see how much money they can make before rendering the service worthless or unusable
How Airbnb accidentally screwed the US housing market and made $100 billion ( www.arktrek.shop )
Dell responds to return-to-office resistance with VPN, badge tracking, and color-coding of employees ( arstechnica.com )
After reversing its position on remote work, Dell is reportedly implementing new tracking techniques on May 13 to ensure its workers are following the company's return-to-office (RTO) policy, The Register reported today, citing anonymous sources....
Italy bans planes that search for migrant boats from using airports ( www.independent.co.uk )
Proton Mail Discloses User Data Leading to Arrest in Spain ( restoreprivacy.com )
KDE Plasma needs stability ( www.youtube.com )
A YouTuber let the Cybertruck close on his finger to test the new sensor update. It didn't go well. ( www.businessinsider.com )
Whistleblower Josh Dean of Boeing supplier Spirit AeroSystems has died ( www.seattletimes.com )
Google lays off hundreds of 'Core' employees, moves some positions to India and Mexico ( www.cnbc.com )
Google is laying off more employees and hiring for their roles outside of the U.S.
The AI grift that can literally poison you ( www.vox.com )
[Thread, post or comment was deleted by the author]
Much ado about "nothing" - Xe Iaso (==Goodbye NixOS) ( xeiaso.net )
https://discourse.nixos.org/t/much-ado-about-nothing/44236...
Chinese battery developer unveils new tech with 1,300-mile range that could revolutionize EVs: 'An important piece of the puzzle' ( www.thecooldown.com )
The west defends Israel’s skies, not doing the same for Ukraine is a deadly mistake: If Europe doesn’t share its air defence systems now, Putin’s threat will only spread. ( www.theguardian.com )
Cross posted from: https://feddit.de/post/11367607...
EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy ( www.theregister.com )
The EU’s Data Protection Board (EDPB) has told large online platforms they should not offer users a binary choice between paying for a service and consenting to their personal data being used to provide targeted advertising....
‘Meta is out of options’: EU regulators reject its privacy fee for Facebook and Instagram ( finance.yahoo.com )
No Tech for Apartheid: Google Workers Arrested for Protesting Company’s $1.2B Contract with Israel ( youtu.be )
Google Ramps Up Crackdown on YouTube Ad-Blocking, Targets Third-Party Apps ( www.ghacks.net )
Google warns users of these apps that their experience may deteriorate soon. They may “experience buffering issues” or see errors such as “the following content is not available on this app” when trying to watch videos....