Same reason I roll my eyes whenever somebody starts talking about Trump and “kompromat.”

It’s not that I don’t think Putin has it, it’s that I don’t think Putin needs it.

The irony is that they’ll do so while simultaneously having “MAGA” emblazoned across their foreheads.

they are literally ATTEMPT THE STEAL activists.

Even this implies too much legitimacy. They are Attempt The Steal CONSPIRATORS.

LOL, no they won’t. They’ll just make you throw out your nail clippers and water, while routinely missing shit that’s actually dangerous.

Okay, but (as per the article) the allegedly-“top” court that made the ruling, the European Union’s General Court (EGC), is not the same as the court that the lawsuit would be appealed to, the European Court of Justice (ECJ). How can the EGC be the “top” court if the ECJ is above it?

Besides, the bottom line is that saying “the top court ruled on this” strongly implies that it’s a final decision, but that’s not the case here. Regardless of the details of which court does what, that’s misleading and therefore clickbait. Don’t write headlines telling me it’s hopeless when there’s actually hope!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawfare

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/dec/22/america-fascism-legal-phase

Wait, how is this a “top court” if the decision is still appealable? Seems like a clickbait headline to me.

In general, you’re not wrong in your summary of how the Web developed. The problem is, though, that you seem to be assuming that since the Web did develop that way, that it had to develop that way. I disagree with that: I think other possibilities existed and might have been viable or even dominant if the dice of fate/random chance had happened to land differently. (And I think that they would’ve been much more likely to be viable or even dominant if some of the regulatory environment had been different, e.g. if residential ISPs hadn’t been allowed to get away with things like drastically asymmetric connections and prohibiting users from running servers. More enforcement of accessibility and standards compliance, instead of tolerating companies deliberately abusing things like Flash and Javascript to unduly restrict users, would’ve also gone a long way.)

and make it look/function the same across different screens and different brands of computers.

That was not only totally optional, but also arguably considered harmful. HTML was intended to leave presentation up to the client to a certain extent, by design. Megalomaniacal marketers and graphic designers demanding to have pixel-perfect control and doing a bunch of dirty hacks (e.g. abusing <table> for page layout instead of tabular data) to achieve it were fundamentally Doing It Wrong.

But I do wonder if anyone is thinking about how foss replacements and competition will gain any ground because honestly they either pay the bills with donations and ads, or they charge a subscription fee because these things cost money to run.

Or they implement a distributed architecture that offloads the bandwidth and storage costs to users directly, a la Bittorrent, IPFS, Freenet, etc.

Look, just because one Russian word starts with K, doesn’t mean you need to be in here trying to insinuate Putin is shilling for the KDE project! ^(j/k)

Or let all the commercial sites go out of business and fucking die, so that the labor-of-love websites that dominated the net in the '90s can return to prominence. And nothing of value would be lost.

Ew. Speaking of technological illiteracy, the author is irresponsibly contributing to it by insinuating that subscription fee ad blockers are somehow inherently better than free ones, which is not only absolute bullshit but also pretty much anti-Free Software propaganda.

“Zionist genocide whitewashing group StopAntisemitism has been named antisemite of the week by Everyone With a Goddamn Brain”

I’m sorry but, as a Georgian, I’m pretty sure she has a 0% chance of either losing her district or getting elected to statewide office, no matter what she does.

Ah, thank you. Considering what a shithole “safe”-ly red district she represents, I didn’t think she had any particular reason to care even with vote losses from a shutdown.

Hydrogen powered shit is dumb.

I had the same skepticism, so I looked into it. The TL;DR is that this isn’t that. It’s not using the hydrogen as a fuel source; it’s using it as reactant in the reduction reaction that produces metallic iron from iron oxide, so that it does { Fe_xO_y + H₂ ⟶ Fe + H₂O } instead of { Fe_xO_y + CO ⟶ Fe + CO₂ }.

(For the record: I completely agree with everything you wrote, except for the small mistake of assuming “hydrogen powered shit” was an accurate description of this particular project.)

to build one of the largest hydrogen fuel furnaces in the world

Hey, it’s a “hydrogen” thing that’s actually not blatant greenwashing, for once! I was skeptical, so I read through to the press release and Wikipedia to figure out what it was talking about, and now I’ll share with the class:

Calling this a “hydrogen fuel furnace” is misleading. The point of this thing isn’t to use hydrogen as an energy storage medium and then burn it to produce heat/fuel-cell-react it to produce electricity. Instead, the point is to use the hydrogen itself as a reactant in the reduction reaction to convert iron oxides to metallic iron. (In other words, there’s actually a good reason for it to use hydrogen specifically, unlike the hydrogen cars we more commonly hear about.)

Specifically, reduction of iron typically occurs via two paths, using either carbon monoxide (CO) or hydrogen gas (H₂). In a “normal” foundry these gases are typically obtained as combustion products of burning coal and the reduction happens along a mix of the two paths.

3 Fe₂O₃ + CO ⟶ 2 Fe₃O₄ + CO₂
Fe₃O₄ + CO ⟶ 3 FeO + CO₂
FeO + CO ⟶ Fe + CO₂

3 Fe₂O₃ + H₂ ⟶ 2 Fe₃O₄ + H₂O
Fe₃O₄ + H₂ ⟶ 3 FeO + H₂O
FeO + H₂ ⟶ Fe + H₂O

Using pure H₂ as the reducing gas eliminates the first path, and produces the iron metal without needing any carbon (assuming it used “green hydrogen” (produced by electrolyzing water using electricity from renewable sources) rather than “blue hydrogen” (produced from natural gas), as doing otherwise would completely defeat the purpose).

There are two caveats, here:

1. Steel plants still need carbon inputs in order to carburize the iron into steel. That’s not a problem in terms of global warming emissions as the carbon is consumed in the process and becomes part of the steel, but it does mean the thing would still consume fossil fuels. (Maybe there’s an opportunity in the future to hook it to CO₂-capture systems and make it net-negative?)

2. The press release describes the furnace being funded as “hydrogen-ready flex-fuel”. In other words, it’s not actually going to run in the environmentally-superior mode I described; it’s just capable of it. The actual magnitude of improvement will be fuck-all until they go further and install a “green hydrogen” source at some undetermined later date that the press release doesn’t even contemplate.

Ah, yes, the Web as it was intended to be, with semantic markup and separate presentation/styling that the user was not only able, but encouraged by design, to override as he saw fit.

I’ve spent pretty much my entire adulthood being low-key pissed off about how that got thoroughly and comprehensively fucked as soon as the marketing fuckwads got their hands on the Web.

Whine some more.

What’s the matter? They can dish it out but can’t take it? LOL, how pathetic!

*immoral