Yawn, are we still repeating blinding repeating this utter nonsense from a year ago?

Removed by mod

FreeCAD requires a lot more clicks. Simple example: You want to extrude part of a sketch. In Fusion360 you select the part, hit extrude, done. In FreeCAD you can’t extrude a part of a sketch, only whole sketches, so you have to make a new sketch, important the geometry of your previous sketch, repaint over the imported geometry to make it an actually sketch and now you are allowed to extrude it. When you have an extrusion that would result in multiple bodies, you have to redo this produce for each and every body, since FreeCAD extrusions are only allowed to produce one body. This can easily turn a 5sec operation into a 10min operation.

On top of that you have the topological naming problem that forces you do basically remoddel your whole thing from scratch if you want to change anything in the early build steps.

There are numerous ways to ease the pain (MasterSketch, Datum planes, ShapeBinder), but they all require a lot of discipline and planing ahead. You can’t just YOLO your models in FreeCAD the way you can in Fusion360.

On the plus side, the discipline FreeCAD forces on you can result in cleaner results. In Fusion360 it’s quite easy to model yourself in a corner were everything is underconstrained and will just exploded if you touch anything. Fusion360 will let you get away with a lot until it is to late. FreeCAD will go “I can’t do that, Dave” a lot sooner and force you to clean up.

All that complaining aside, FreeCAD is my CAD tool of choice. I am never going to touch Fusion360 with its ever more restrictive licensing scheme ever again.

Not really. Systemd had the complete opposite problem, it did far more than the previous hackery of shell scripts. The complaints were that it was too big, had too many features, violated Unix philosophy and was less deterministic. Systemd had no problem fully replacing init, cron, DNS and Co. Wayland simply can’t replace X11 in it’s current state, it just can’t do a lot of basic things.

such as no massive gaping security issues.

That’s an utter strawman that doesn’t get any more true by repeating it. Nobody cares about display manager security at this point, since every app you run already has full system access anyway. Wayland security is like making sure the door is locked after the thief is already in the house. It might become relevant in a future when every app you run is in a Flatpak sandbox, but we are a very long way away from that. Even apps that use Flatpak are rarely sandboxed to the point that it would improve security. And on top of that, the sandboxing model Flatpak uses fundamentally doesn’t really work with a lot of Unix tools, e.g. how would you Flatpak something like make?

The issue isn’t just that the features had to be reimplemented, but that they were not part of Wayland to begin with. Wayland does only do the most basic stuff and leaves everything else to the compositor (aka Gnome or KDE). That means every compositor will implement their own hacky version of the missing functionality and it takes ages until that gets unified again, so that apps can actually use that functionality.

Wayland is a classic case of an underspecified software project, they do a thing and they might even do it well, but what they are doing is only a fraction of what is actually needed for it to work properly in the real world. That’s why we are 15 years later and the new “simpler” Wayland is still not ready.

but missing some amenities

Like doorknobs or windows. Wayland wasn’t just trimmed down, it was trimmed down to the point of being non-functional and it has taken ages to slowly patch that back up.

X11 is an multiple decade old dinosaur, the developer decided it was growing too complex and no longer representing how graphics are done on modern systems and decided a rewrite. While doing so they decided to simplify some things along the way and in doing so they drastically overshoot their target and removed tons of fundamental functions that was present in X11 (stuff like being able to take screenshots, window manager, etc.). Some of that is slowly getting reimplemented and Wayland is getting closer to actually being a feature-parity X11 replacement, but it’s also taken 15 years and is still not done. The whole drama is the conflict between people wanting it as default and the other group of people for which it simply doesn’t work in its current state.

Windows has much better forward and backward compatibility than Linux, that’s why 10 year old Windows is still fine. 10 year old Linux on the other side just means nothing modern will work on it. That’s really only usable in extreme edge cases. Flatpak and Snap somewhat address this, but that also puts you back into the forced-upgrade treadmill, as Flatpak runtimes don’t have LTS support (not sure how Snap handles this).

Peak Firefox was back in 2010/2011, almost 14 years ago, it has been steadily dropping market share ever since. This is not a new problem by any stretch.

which goes a long way to scaling back on the reliance of google donations.

$3 million is about 0.67% of the money they get from Google and that money isn’t even going into Firefox development.

The day Firefox shutters its doors is the day the internet truly dies.

Firefox is little more than just a Chrome clone itself, financed by Google no less. It doesn’t do anything to set itself apport. If they cared about an open Internet they should have put some effort into building it (support RSS, Torrent, IPFS, etc.). If Firefox dies tomorrow, nothing much would change as the rest of the Internet already didn’t care. It might however make room for a browser that actually cares about privacy and an open Internet, instead of just using those words for marketing purpose while still having telemetry by default.

Time to write some bug reports. ~/.cache is supposed to be disposable.

Not really. Recommendation algorithms are great for discovering related information and new stuff. They even beat search at its own game, as search is often limited to plain text, while the algorithms take the broader context into account. The problem is that you have no control over the recommendations, no transparency how they work, no way to switch or disable them and no way to explore the deeper knowledge hidden in them. It’s all just a magical black box for more engagement and more ads.

A recommendation algorithms that somehow manages to be open and transparent would be a very big step towards fixing the Web. Lemmy and Co. are too busy replicating failed technology from 30 years ago instead of actually fixing the underlying problems.

ls reaction to this is unexpected:

$ mkdir foo
$ echo Foo > foo/file
$ chmod a-x  foo
$ ls -l foo
ls: cannot access 'foo/file': Permission denied
total 0
-????????? ? ? ? ?            ? file

I expected to just get a “Permission denied”, but listing the content it can still do. So x is for following the name to the inode and r for listing directory content (i.e. just names)?

It’s federated, not decentralized. Which even Mastodon itself doesn’t seem to realize or care, since they falsely advertise themselves as decentralized.

Decentralized means there is no central authority.

Federation just means there are many centralized authorities, that might or might not communicate with each other.

I really don’t see what Mastodon is supposed to solve in the long run. The server has full control and can do whatever it wants. Just look at what happened Threads.net. Big company joins the Fediverse and instead of celebrating, everybody starts thinking about defederating them. This approach is doomed to fail if it ever gets popular.

Nostr looks like a much more promising approach, with proper cryptographic identities and signatures. Nobody owns you there. Servers are just dumb relays. If one steps out of line, you can just use another one.

DDG is just a wrapper around Bing and substantially worse than Google, smaller index and less up to date. Not needing a login doesn’t really guarantee you anything either, as they still can identify you by IP or device finger print if they want to. You basically have to trust their marketing that they don’t do that.

What makes Kagi interesting is that it’s actually right up there with Google in terms of results, while surpassing it in terms of features. Would I pay $10/month for Kagi? Nope. It’s good, but not magic. It’s still just regular Internet search and you’ll find most of what it finds with other search engines as well, especially when you hop between multiple. But if you want a better search engine and have the money, Kagi does feel like an upgrade, which the other alternatives just don’t.

For one, it’s based in the USA, so it is legally subject to the insane, antidemocratic, and awful state surveillance there.

https://kagi.com/privacy at least sounds pretty good.

It is also a corporation, so it is subject to enshittification.

https://blog.kagi.com/safe-round this sound good as well.

The part that I don’t get is how they can match Google in terms of search results quality when Microsoft couldn’t even get close with Bing and a heck of a lot more time and money.