I mean, imagine if non-british companies just went "well, no encryption for you, then."

And disabled TLS too.

Online Banking would probably just have to... stop.
And a lot of other pages wouldn't load on most browsers requiring https

yeah, well, even the @twitter account now has the X logo.

x.com redirects to twitter.com as well.

Wonder if Businesses will replace the twitter logo in their windows as well.

With Ukraine being a breadbasked, I wonder how many fields are unusable.
probably lots. That sucks for a lot of people.

This is why we need Firefox.

And Firefox needs to be a market that can't be ignored.

Shattered Pixel Dungeon
Mindustry

Rightly so, see this current Thread: Microsoft wants to move Windows fully to the cloud

Windows 365 is a service that streams a full version of Windows to devices. So far, it’s been limited to just commercial customers, but Microsoft has been deeply integrating it into Windows 11 already. A future update will include Windows 365 Boot, which will enable Windows 11 devices to log directly in to a Cloud PC instance at boot instead of the local version of Windows.

If Microsoft really wants to slowly kill "local windows", Valve would be fucked if there is no way for gamers to game locally.
It'll be hard enough to compete with "performance on demand" anyway, at least until Microsoft pushes the pricing back up after luring everyone in.
See Netflix, everyone loved it, no-one bought DVDs/BlueRays, and now everyone hates Netflix for raised prices, going after password-sharing, cancelling shows etc.
I expect exactly the same with "cloud PCs"

I'd assume people move when something better comes around.
But "better, more functional" is a relative term. Not sure that many here would be willing to forgo federation, and thus the independence from corporations, which especially don't like piracy.

Btw, have you specifically told people what about the UI/UX you find problematic, so that it could be improved?
And has kbin the same issue for you (as it federates as well, you can travel this community through kbin just fine)

then put in X Disks.

we did that with (floppy) disks forever, and CDs too.

I don't remember any DVDs using that, but they surely existed

meta can already freely pull that data from any instance
ActivityPub baby!

I disagree.

I hope there'll be people discussing sensibly.
For example the question how the rest of the fediverse would like Meta to act, when / if they have the by far largest instance on Fediverse with Threads.
Should they Rate-Limit queries from their users to other Instances, as to not overload them? This would protect other instances, but make the federated experience worse, driving more people to threads.
Would the Fediverse rather that Meta mirrors images etc on their servers too, or pull those from the original server?
Maybe they have UX ideas that would be useful to have somewhat uniform (like the subreddit/community/magazine stuff here), and would like input on them.

Of course just blocking them is an option for the fediverse, but doing that blindly seems like a missed opportunity for both sides.
More freely available content would be great, wouldn't it?

Maybe they have Ideas on the protocol, that they want to talk with admins about as a first step to gain more perspective. And certainly they are likely to be data-hungry greedy shit, but there is a chance that they are actually good ideas - there are actual people working at meta after all.

There's tons of ways in which this could be useful, and I don't really understand the completely blocking approach I see a lot of.
They want to use ActivityPub, that's awesome, finally something new and big that uses an open freaking standard on the web. What are the downsides? If it sucks for communities they can easily block Meta.
Yes, Meta is not a Company working for the betterment of the world, certainly.
But maybe, just maybe, goals align here, and Meta can make money and improve the Fediverse and the Internet with it. And certainly, maybe they want to "take over" ActivityPub, and that would indeed be bad. And even then, wouldn't knowing because they told you be much better than knowing because they're meta?
So, if they want to change the Protocol, be very, very wary of their proposals. But even there there they could just want reasonable improvements because they suddenly deal with 100x of the next biggest instances.

tl;dr: when you tell people what you'd like them to do, it increases the chances of them doing that.

Phew, I wonder if the rich people really understood the dangers.

The CEO/Pilot won't get much compassion from me, I think he was told be enough people that the vehicle wasn't safe for the job.
Not sure how much of that was communicated to the passengers though.
I know they had to sign a waiver, but you have to do that for a lot of things that are much more safe.

I mean, it's a currently approved PR

There's also an active Issue about replacing captchas (which are often an issue privacy-wise) with a mCaptcha, where you computer does "Bitcoin-Like" useless calculations which the server easily can verify that you did.
So it would be much more costly to make a billion spam accounts