I appreciate the honesty.

Anyway, more access to the open source packages can’t be bad.

I think it said it’s deprecated or something? I’m not sure, I just know I had problems downloading packages before.

I don’t think it was setup.py . I think I tried to download it directly through pip install xx==0.4.0 or something (the version was required by the program) and it said the package doesn’t exist.

But do Appimages make the dependencies code available? They pack everything into one working program, but what about the packages?

I couldn’t download it even if I wanted to. That’s what I mean. It returns a message saying it isn’t supported.

And the UK have tested their laser weapons this year and took out a drone with them last month.

If prior versions were not support by pip anymore, so yes, if it were removed. There are cases of packages not being supported by the platforms, aren’t there? I’ve run into cases where the package was fully deprecated and not useable or downloadable anymore.

What do you mean?

I just find that if pip did not support that version anymore, the software would be lost. As that is covered by making executables, as I mentioned them. But what if I wanted to have access to the libraries that were used in the program? That wouldn’t be possible. Because all we get in the source code is the dependency fetching, not the dependencies themselves.

It would be good to have an alternative where you get all that you need to compile the code again, not depending on fetching them from websites that might not even have them anymore.

This mentality of ephemeral code just adheres to the way big tech would like to do things, with programmed obsolescence.

An alternative to that way of doing things would be nice and would make sure we get access to the same working open source program in 30 or 40 years.

I think you can link bluesky to your personal domain. I’m not sure how it works.

I don’t want to make Mastodon propaganda, but Mastodon talks around technology are much better than Twitter ever was.

I’m tired of people arguing that the sum of the people in the platform does not equal its culture. Facebook and other social networks clearly benefit from having influencers in their platform, and they make the platform orbit around it.

People who use facebook are not responsible for old people posting what they want. But also, Facebook earns profit from that kind of behavior, so it makes its algorithms circle around it.

It’s like saying Instagram isn’t responsible for all the influencers and the ‘vibe’ it has. It is responsible for it and you don’t make the platform your own, especially not with the Big players.

Even Mastodon, where you can set up your own instance, has its culture, even if it is richer (culturally) than Instagram or Facebook.

No, each person does not make the platform their own or make out of it what they will. Only a masochist would stay on Facebook preaching their own culture while they have other options that fit better.

Your argument fails.

Also, on another note, I’m tired of Carl Sagan’s atheists using Darwinism as basis for lack of a God, and I’m not a christian or muslim. That’s just reason to silence people who don’t want to take “scientific” argument at face value. True science is debatable and built upon healthy discussion. Not something you toss at other people to make them seem dumb or preach like a religion.

To each its own, I like it here.

What would you suppose it is ambition, to feed off influencers? What good would that bring to the platform?

If the people who used it would benefit at least. But then again, that’s cryptocurrency culture, so I don’t know if both complete each other.

You can see other instances at work in the app already. There is an @ symbol that says where the message comes from, and those differ from each other already.

I have no access to the article, but it seems like we’re one step closer to the Philosopher’s Stone.

I think it’s interesting to see something related to the magic posted in the other article. What it’s all about. Also, the paper isn’t that complex to read. It goes through talking about quantum simulations (probably through Qiskit) and the differences between magical schemas and ordinary ones. I think it’s interesting to see what it’s all about.

Scientific communicators try to be didactic about Science but always miss the mark on what’s really going on, especially in Quantum Mechanics. Sadly, we don’t see the same enthusiasm from these people for other areas of Physics - the classical.

If you’re going to write “self-help” books on a scientific topic, might as well go all the way.

What I mean is, this paper is a fun read. Someone that has a grasp about computers will understand and appreciate.

ElasticSearch is the most studied academically database search. This is enough to be happy with this reality. If we are to open new FOSS alternatives, it goes through ElasticSearch, if we are to depend on academic science.

I’m not sure, but clearly something happens on the background, as my Debian drive broke after I changed it back and forth for the Windows drive. Grub fell back to rescue mode. After following some instructions and trying to boot from grub command line, Debian wouldn’t boot after it recognized the mouse. That’s what I know. Even in different drives, something happens on the PC when you go back and forth with Windows and Linux.

Do you think I can program on a Windows VM? Do you work with it? I still use Windows because I need my programs to work on Windows (had my programs built on Linux fail on Windows Machines before). Do you have experience on this?

Not on my experience. But separate machines would work, if Microsoft never releases a “Wi-Fi network security patch for compatibility with all machines”.

It’s not just about privacy. Linux and open source communities are a safespace for a novel way of doing things.