> But what kind of speech is supressed nowadays on X?
Is there even a way to find out, considering their main feed is a product of opaque suggestion algorithm and very few use the Following timeline as the main mode?
> what about Bluesky? does Bluesky not supress any speech?
The end-user is put in charge of that and by default it’s a chronological feed, I believe, which means no suppression unless it’s something illegal in US (CSAM, links to CSAM, etc.) and Bluesky could be held responsible for distrubuting that stuff.
Meanwhile Twitter is now openly suppressing links off-site. For financial reasons rather than ideological ones (although the latter may also be occurring).
not to mention that gp editor is disabled on non pro windows. i think there is some kind of a funky command line or registry hack to enable it. So yeah, I moved on from windows largely because of this force fed software.
Windows licensing is the hardest part of my job. Like if I want to have thin clients running Windows 11 VMs hosted on Windows Server 2022, how do I pay Microsoft so they will let me use the software in this way? I have no idea. I think you need to contact some kind of client services representative at Microsoft in order to figure out the whole licensing thing. By the way if it wasn't clear, I hate all of this. The only good thing about it is that I can make a living by dealing with it so other people don't have to.
But it sounds like in Italy you entered the coffee shop to drink coffee and socialize - which fulfills the mission of a coffee shop.
However, I noticed that in post-pandemic Poland and the USA where i spend a lot of time, coffee shops are starting to become more like coworking spaces where the "laptop class" is demanding not only perpetual space but worst of all, silence, since they are busy working and concentrating. It is simply not what it used to be.
I disagree with the silence bit. I am a frequent remote worker at coffee shops across the USA and people working have noise canceling headphones usually, I have never seen anyone demand silence in a coffee shop. Libraries are a different story.
We were asked by the staff to re-seat at different table from the 'laptop class' in Montreal cafe because we were speaking in normal voice. Sample of one, but still.
I'm dealing with a very large partitioned table (several millions of inserts per day) and i solve this by running `vacuum analyze` nightly which somehow solved 99% our read issues
Prior to that, we tried various indexing strategies, de-normalizing some of the data, but ultimately i found that weird plan inconsistency to be solved by the vacuum job
> any site or service that makes sexually explicit materials available
so basically, the internet.
> Canadian ISPs required to ensure that the sites are rendered inaccessible
At best, this is regulatory capture for the current tech giants, at worst, basically ability to hand pick who gets to see what sites. So yes, censorship
under the cloak of "age verification" and "protecting kids". We have heard it all before. I'm surprised they didn't somehow stuff the "terrorism" angle in there as well.
>At best, this is regulatory capture for the current tech giants, at worst, basically ability to hand pick who gets to see what sites.
It hasn't happened with any other censorship bill Canada has passed.
This includes laws on pronoun use:
Canada’s gender identity rights Bill C-16 explained
>through a process that would start with a complaint and progress to a proceeding before a human rights tribunal. If the tribunal rules that harassment or discrimination took place, there would typically be an order for monetary and non-monetary remedies. A non-monetary remedy may include sensitivity training, issuing an apology, or even a publication ban, he says.
That's not a censorship bill, that's an anti-harassment bill. Harassment is illegal everywhere: I'm not free to follow you around calling you an asshole. I could get charged for that, especially if you're my employee, tenant, or in the presence of other exacerbating factors. Canadian hate law says I'm not free to follow you around making disparaging comments about your race. C-16 expands that to say that I'm not allowed to follow you around disparaging your gender identity. That's it.
This bill, conversely, gives the government explicit power to block websites that host content that is not child-appropriate. Completely different.
but wouldn't the wind exert some pressure on the back of the bird? wouldn't it not generate any lift otherwise and just drop back to the ground? like sails on a sailboat, for the sailors it feels like there is no wind, but the sails are carrying massive pressure
If you’re in a boat in a river, your “natural” speed is the speed of the river. Same with air.
You point about a sailboat and wind is confused; the pressure comes from the fact that the boat is traveling at one speed through the water and at a different speed through the air.
ok, if the bird's natural speed is that of the ambient air, then how does it stay up? the bird is not lighter than air, so where does the upwards pressure on the bird come from? either the bird must flap its wings to stay up or there must be speed difference between the bird and the ambient air to generate lift.
There is a speed difference between birds and the ambient air. Birds don't just drift aimlessly with the wind, they flap their wings and gain airspeed. But from their perspective, the "speed" at which they're flying is entirely relative to the mass of air, and not the ground.
This isn't some mystery, it's the same way boats and planes work. Consider a plane flying at 100 knots of airspeed. If the mass of air they're in is moving perpendicular to the plane at 50 knots, the plane will track diagonally across the ground even though it's pointed forward. The plane won't experience side loads because it's tracking 50 units sideways (with respect to the ground) for every 100 units it moves forwards, the exact same as the "wind". If the plane is instead in a 100 knot headwind, it will be stationary with respect to the ground. It won't drop out of the air, but it also won't make headway to its destination either.
From a mechanics perspective, neither the plane nor the bird care about what the ground is doing once they're airborne. The only thing they care about is the mass of air they're aloft in.
that is my point - in order to stay up, the bird would need to either flap its wings for 700 miles non-stop (unlikely) in order to maintain velocity difference between it and the ambient air OR glide which basically means he was not traveling at the speed of ambient air, otherwise there would be no lift pressure generated on his wings and he would drop to the ground
Ignore the storm for a moment, and ask whether a bird can fly for 7h+, either from flapping, gliding, or navigating updrafts. The answer is yes, that's trivial for many many bird species, especially those with a propensity for ocean travel. The storm then just changes the baseline ground speed.
The comparison with the balloon is perhaps not entirely accurate since birds like you say, fly using lift from the wings. So they need to have some relative speed vs the air.
The point is that as long as the entire body of air the bird is flying through is moving uniformly and without acceleration, it's perceptually indistinguishable from calm air (except visually, and even that only when flying pretty low).
For rotating and turbulent air, which would both not be totally unheard of in a hurricane, this probably doesn't apply though.
This is probably like when you swim out at the beach, and back and find you are 20m away from where you started due to currents. But you didn’t feel it.
With dead reckoning you could probably figure out.
You can’t feel linear/unaccelerated motion, and biological organisms aren’t great at indirectly deriving it from acceleration and rotation over time the way inertial navigation systems do.
A sailboat uses the speed difference between the water (basically stationary) and the wind. A bird (or sailplane) just moves along with the wind. Birds and sailplanes can however hang around areas of rising air to overcome their natural sink rate.
When you're flying, wind is no longer the air moving over the ground, it's the ground moving under the air. It doesn't produce acceleration except for a brief moment when you leave the ground.
>for the sailors it feels like there is no wind, but the sails are carrying massive pressure
The only way this is possible is if the sails are moving at a different airspeed than the sailors, which is only possible if 1) the sailor is running up and down the deck or 2) there is an windspeed gradient with altitude, which the sails penetrate by virtue of being tall.
But what kind of speech is supressed nowadays on X? what about Bluesky? does Bluesky not supress any speech?