Really uh...
Setting themselves up for success uh..
this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2025
368 points (96.7% liked)
Technology
63746 readers
3667 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Great to see our representatives finally focusing on the real issues in these difficult times.
load more comments
(3 replies)
Democrats: "Please for the love of God, don't vote for us ever again! We really, really don't want to win."
Lemmy: "Fuck that, I'll vote blue no matter who. You can't tell me what to do"
Democrats:
D E M O C R A T singular, one. Not democrats. For fucks sake it's on the bloody title!
Why are people so willfully ignorant?
US Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) today proposed ...
Cause people fail to awknowledge there is more to politics than just left and right, or progressive and conservative, etc.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Trump is president and this is their priority?
Of course it is, what else would you expect from the controlled opposition party?
Why wouldn't it be? People's interests don't bring in money
The country is being burned to the ground from the inside by fascists, and this is the hill Democrat politicians choose to die on?!! Holy shit! What a fucking joke!
The shepherd and the dog might be in agreement.
Democrats: why won't anyone vote for us?
Also Democrats: let's be like the Republicans, they get so many votes! Let's miss the entire point of democracy and just support large companies!
Because they want the big money donors more than they want to win. Their campaigns are above all designed to bring in money for the high-priced consultants.
Lofgren is a corporate stooge is the message I'm getting.
Democrats once again losing on purpose.
This somehow reads with the same energy as those "please don't download scientific papers for free from , that would be so terrible" posts.
77 year old who has been in the house since the 90s. Actually a prime example of why we need term limits and real competition in elections (if not from GOP, at least in primaries). Irony is she reps a district that isn't really associated with streaming or producing movies.
My guess? She won her primary because she was the incombent or was unopposed, but she probably receives cash from the film industry. Almost all house seats are uncompetitive unless someone drops out or gets redistricted. Until something changes, this is and will be the way our government continues to work.
in power since the 90s
Oh so carrying the torch for the LAST time they tried to go after media with the moral panic of "Explicit" music label stuff led by Tipper Gore? The one where Twisted Sister showed up in 1985. A continuation from when they had a panic about VHS recordings in 1969 and Mr Rogers testified.
I specially went Obama over Clinton because she was still saying in 2008 how video games promote violence. There's a certain type of Dem, and they're still ramming them down our throats.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Sometimes I feel like democrats don't actually care more about voters, they just care much more about appearances.
Idk man, that sounds like evidence based thinking to me, reported.
And rich people
Even out of power they still find a way to give hand jobs for industry donations and casually screw the public. I admire their energy.
Nothing will meaningfully improve until the rich fear for their lives
load more comments
(1 replies)
"Man we really got trounced in that election "
"Yeah we should really work on our image"
"Yeah. Oh I know! You know how everyone hated that tik tok ban?"
"Yeah?"
"Well what if that, but more!"
"But people hated the ban...."
"Oh right, no, the movie industry is paying us to do this."
"Oh why didn't you just say so."
On the one hand, more Dems voted no on tiktok ban
On the other hand, you can bet any bipartisan bill is not in the interest of the American people
If they are not blocking the access to the WHO.is servers you can get the IP address of the site and add it to your local hosts file.
load more comments
(3 replies)
After the US does this, Europe will be soon to follow guaranteed, then everyone will be trying to pipe through the same VPN exit server in Barbados
load more comments
(1 replies)
oh cool, tackling the key issues facing us right now
Is the capability to block any website something the Democrats want to enable with for Trump to abuse?
Yes, then they can blame him for it but still get paid by the oligarchs who wanted the bill.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Article 1) Streaming prices going up Article 2) websites being blocked
This is some dumb shit.
invest in VPN providers
I'm guessing lofgren has already done that
Wait until they start "the VPN wars". it's invariable at this point. Only the VPN that has bribed The Emperor the most will survive.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Cockroaches using the government to make oppressive laws. I think I'm still ancap.
load more comments
(1 replies)
its uh, definitely one of the feelings of all time reading through threads like this, assuming these are actual real people, spending their actually real time, talking about these actually real things.
I'm missing the part where consumers are required to use their ISP DNS. I never do, in favour of CloudFlare DNS, Google DNS, etc
load more comments
(2 replies)
This is some fascist (& not at all surprising) shit.
@some_guy is there such a thing as an open source dns and encrypted DNS? Or federated DNS?
It's actually surprisingly centralized.
It sort if have to be. In the end there has to be one source of truth for each TLD, otherwise who is to say who owns foo.com, and what it resolves to?
And then the same structure for assigning TLD ownership.
But there is nothing stopping you from running another DNS service, call it DNS2 with different root servers, etc. It is just going to be extemely hard to convince people to use it.
load more comments
(4 replies)
view more: next ›