Atemu

It used to use Google search results but they switched to Bing. It is worse than Google.

That'd be news to me and an ad hoc comparison I just did shows results much closer to Google than Bing with results usually just locally having switched places while on Bing it's an entirely different order.

They do(did?) use Bing for mobile search results because daddy Google forced them to not be competitive on the platform they're most interested in.

from which interesting derivatives will show up.

I don't think that will happen and hope it won't because NixOS can handle the usual preferences people might have internally.

Don't like glibc? pkgsMusl is the entire package set but with musl instead of glibc.
Want static compilation? pkgsStatic.
Afraid of systemd? Well okay, we don't have that right now but I don't think anyone would be opposed to optional support for worse service managers. It'd just be an opt-in toggle that we could support with enough people interested in it.

DRM should work on the RPI GPU. What happens when you run i.e. sway from the CLI?

That'd be an insane blow and would take years if not decades to recover from.

That's not how this works. Save the post if you want to return to it later. You will not be notified of new answers in this thread if you comment.

Who the hell thought we’d want to get harassed on every site we visit?

The sites' operators.

The GDPR does not mandate cookie banners. The GDPR mandates informed consent to processing of your data beyond what is technically necessary to facilitate the service. If all you're doing is store session ids, user preferences or whatever, you need no cookie banner whatsoever.
Lemmy also uses cookies. Do you see a banner? Me neither.

Menial banners to "convince"/trick users into accepting severe privacy intrusions (cookies are the least of your concerns here) are an invention of the websites. Most of them aren't even legal as they often do opt-out (straight up against what is written in the law) or use dark patterns to trick users into giving consent (obviously not actual consent).

It's taking a while but the law is slowly being enforced now. Expect slightly less terrible cookie banners in the future. Whenever you do see one though, blame the site operators and law enforcement, not the GDPR.

9/10 empfehlen ein beliebiges Zahnpflegeprodukt, da sie Zahnpflege unabhängig vom Produkt empfehlen.

cars will still be needed for at least 50 years

Unfortunately, I think you're right. I think they'll be needed much longer even and I do think the future of transport contains a few cars for i.e. places too far away to sensibly connect with rail. That'll hopefully only amount to a rather negligible fraction of transport.

subsidies don’t take away from those other efforts.

I don't think that's true. EV subsidies just reek of greenwashing. "Oh look how progressive we are, we're spending billions to support EVs!" while showing next to no actual support for sensible alternatives.

EV sales make their cronies' pockets grow larger, cycle paths don't.

As for emissions, a car has a lower carbon footprint in the US after 1 to 5 years conservatively

Lower than what?

after that is 61% less carbon dioxide per mile with average US energy mix.

That'd be nice but it fully ignores the cost of the vehicle itself.

https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/electric_emissions.html#wheel

I have two issues with that data:

1. It also ignores the cost of the vehicle itself (only a note without concrete numbers at the bottom)
2. "light duty vehicles" does not sound representative of the average US car which (to my knowledge) is usually large&heavy in order to circumvent regulations (SUVs, pick-ups, ...)

Smells a bit like a lie tbh.

1. is especially problematic because it massively skews percentages. If you leave out the cost of producing just the vehicle (even without battery), you make BEVs look much better because you only consider the one factor on which BEVs are actually better while ignoring the significant factors in car emissions that BEVs don't improve on or even worsen.

According to my source, the production of the battery and the base vehicle combined produce about as many emissions as the electricity generation the entire lifetime of a BEV.
By omitting that, you ignore about half of the BEVs lifetime emissions but only 10-20% of an ICE's. Do you see how that's not really a valid way of measuring the BEV advantage when absolute terms matter?

Take a look at the left graph on page 3: https://www.bmuv.de/fileadmin/Daten_BMU/Download_PDF/Verkehr/emob_klimabilanz_bf.pdf

You can read it without knowing German: "Benzin" means "petrol", brown/orange are fuel emissions, green is vehicle production, gray is battery production and greenish-yellow is electricity production (in Germany, mind you). Y-axis is emissions per kilometre.
(The graph to the right is the same but a projection for 2030 when some amount of batteries are (supposedly) going to be produced in the EU under stricter emissions standards and better electricity mix (seems veery optimistic though IMHO).)

It doesn't iterate on Flatpak, it's its own thing.

Describing Nix in detail would require a PHD thesis but in short it takes the concept of a version to the extreme; capturing every property about some package and encoding that into the "version"; a package bar-0.1.0 that depends on foo-1.0.0 and a package bar-0.1.0 depending on foo-1.0.0 that has been built with the same GCC but a patch applied to it are considered entirely separate. This implies that your package bar cannot accidentally depend on the wrong foo and that both can be present at the same time.
Using a functional DSL, you implicitly build up a tree of such "exact versions" of dependencies and this tree is then "realised" bottom to top.
It takes many inspirations from functional programming such as purity and immutability. The build takes place in a sandbox with no filesystem access outside the declared dependencies and not networking whatsoever and cannot be changed after the fact. This aims to ensure that a build really only depends on the paths it claims to depend on (those paths must also be "exact" versions) such that running the build again with the same inputs results in the exact same output.

Again, describing Nix in detail would go beyond the scope of this comment but this approach comes with many useful properties which prevent entire classes of issues you could encounter with classical package managers such as dependency hell.

It's not tied to NixOS either (that's its own thing again; doing Linux system configuration management using Nix), you can install Nix packages on pretty much any Linux as it doesn't interfere with your classical package manager. Give it a try: https://nixos.org/download.html

Have you seen how hard it is to convince governments to invest the most efficient and cost-effective medium to long distance mean of transport we have today that has proven itself over hundreds of years?

Now imagine trying to convince them to invest in pretty much the same thing but with a tiny fraction of the throughput and many times the cost.

It's not much of a technical issue. They can be built and will be feasibly buildable in the not too distant future. The problem is economical.

(Though I must admit that I could absolutely see the US investing in Hyperloops to transport aristocrats instead of high-speed rail for the peasants. I was more thinking of countries here that are republics with half-decent democracies.)

I think EV credits are a good thing for society because of the lower environmental cost than gasoline vehicles.

I would think so too if the second part was true. While the emission cost of an EV indeed about 30% lower (data for Germany, probably worse in the US), that means it's still 70% as bad as an ICE. That's an amazing relative efficiency gain and super interesting technologically but it's still pretty shit in absolute terms.
The future of transport is not cars everywhere but with electric engines; that's still not sustainable (far from it).

What actually needs subsidies are alternatives to cars:

• Trains are incredibly efficient compared to EVs and viable for any distance greater than ~1km. The US has basically none and most places with better trains aren't that amazing either.
• Walking can be incredibly convenient with no special infrastructure required other than a relatively well paved path. No looking for parking spots or whatever; just walk out of your home, around a corner and into the shop.
  Pretty much requires the absence of heavy and/or fast vehicles and needs attractive locations nearby. If you have to cross busy roads or have nothing of interest within 1km or so, walking just doesn't really work (see: Walkable cities).
• Cycling is efficient, healthy and fast for ranges of up to a few kilometres. Similar to walking, it requires separation from cars but is slightly more compatible with cars due to it's higher speed which means not so busy streets (as in: destinations, 30km/h max.) can often be shared.
  Bicycles do need a bit more infrastructure than walking however: Well-paved paths (ideally separate from pedestrians) and racks to lock them to. This isn't nearly as bad as cars but even this very efficient form of individual vehicle can reach limits at some point (see: Bike racks near train stations in the Netherlands).

Mit ihren "kriminellen Aktionen und penetranter Rücksichtslosigkeit" sorgte die Klimaschutzgruppe nicht für eine Steigerung der Akzeptanz für den Klimaschutz.

Richtig. Ist nicht deren Ziel, Brudi.

Die netteren Hinweise auf den Klimaschutz wurden ignoriert. Protest ist die einzig noch verbleibende Möglichkeit, überhaupt noch etwas zu erreichen, bevor es zu spät ist.