Lvxferre

It isn’t “Hangul” that is saving the language, but the fact that it’s getting an orthography. That orthography could be theoretically in any writing system - not just Latin or Arabic (both already exist for Cia-Cia, contrariwise to what the video claims), but even a native one or Cyrillic or even, dunno, the Cherokee syllabary.

Abidin looks informed on the matter; the same cannot be said about whoever produced this video. I’ll highlight a few issues.

[0:33] - pretty much all languages are “syllable-based”. They organise sounds into syllables. The video is likely trying to convey that it’s a CV (consonant, vowel, repeat) language, unlike, say, Russian or English (that cram quite a lot of consonants in a single syllable).

[0:36] The video is trying to use “transliterated” as a posh synonym for “spelled”; both are not the same thing. Transliteration is to convert text from a script from another; for example, “Quis credis esse, Bellum?” (Latin, using the Latin script) → “Кўис кредис ессе, Беллум?” (Latin, using the Cyrillic script instead) is transliteration.

And you can spell pretty much any language in any writing system. The association between grapheme and sounds (or phonemes) is arbitrary.

You might say “but the Latin alphabet doesn’t have a letter for /ɓ/!” - well, it doesn’t have a letter for /ʃ/ either. Italian handled it by spelling it ⟨sci⟩, English as ⟨sh⟩, Polish as ⟨sz⟩, Portuguese kind of repurposed ⟨x⟩. And the current Latin spelling for Cia-Cia - that you can check here - handled /ɓ/ just fine, using a similar approach as the Hangul one.

Even here in South America, depending on the region, they’re invasive.

He’s almost Karate Kid!

(I don’t care about USA enough to discuss its specificities. I’ll talk about fascism.)

It’s a mistake to conflate two enemies. Even if you hate both for the same reasons, once you conflate them, you lose the ability to fight against at least one of them.

And what the video describes as “friendly fascism” has barely anything to do with fascism. And it has already a name - plutocracy, or “government of the rich”.

Once you disregard witch hunters and their brainfarts, fascism has a rather consistent bundle of traits:

0. “strength through union”
1. conflation between a government, its population, and a “nation”
2. persecution of minorities as “harming our unity”
3. a “strong leader” taking decisions for you
4. hate against separatist movements
5. emphasis on traditional values
6. a discourse of a “glorious past” to return to
7. usage of force to silence dissidence

By far #0 is the most important trait of fascism, as the others come from it. In the meantime plutocracy (or “friendly fascism”) would fit #3, arguably #7. And the contempt for liberalism and electoral politics appears for different reasons for both - ideological and pragmatic respectively.

Once you make this distinction, this video becomes specially interesting to watch, as it allows you to notice how one of your enemies is using the other to kill you with a borrowed knife.

They hire specialised people in Cuiabá (where this vid is from) to do it. Picture related:

(I’m joking. They have a herd mentality and cars look threatening, so I think that this behaviour pops up naturally.)

This would sound extremely xenophobic in another context. Here, though? Someone from China, living in England, poking fun at Chinglish cars? It’s part of the joke!

Here’s what I found in the source code:

My sides went into orbit. ASCII art and a message to people reading the source? I did this with my blog in the 00s!

Yup, basically. They’ll throw whatever they have near them at you; and this is just my guess but I think that they have enough of a theory of mind to think “I don’t like poop smell so you don’t like it either”.

I also feel like the time when the other guy grabs the cage he was trying to find a way out, to get rid of the annoyers.

The chimps were not dancing, or playing. They are clearly pissed. The “dance” and noises are ways to say “this is our territory, not yours, back off”. Throwing the ball is an act of aggression, but since nobody took a clue he made it even clearer with poop.

For more sociable interactions between humans and other apes check this video (“Human, you have you baby! I’m going to show you mine!”).

Actually interesting video! I’m clueless when it comes to fonts, but a few comments about the start (when he gives it some historical background):

What the Phoenicians did was to take a look at the hieroglyphs like, “Yeah! Love that! But… what if we made the symbols even more abstract?”

I know, he’s oversimplifying it (as it is not the focus of the video), but it’s worth noting that this abstraction was done by the Egyptians themselves, while writing hieroglyphs. Hieroglyphs often use something called the “rebus principle”, where you represent a word by a similar-sounding word. For example, “son of” /sa/ was often represented with ⟨𓅬⟩, a white-fronted goose /za/ - because they sound practically the same.

(It’s a lot like writing “I like The Beatles” as ⟨👁️👍🪲🪲⟩. Why ⟨👁️⟩? Because it sounds the same as “I”.)

What the Canaanites (including the Phoenicians) did was to use this rebus principle in a more consistent way, and only for the first consonant of the word. For example, ⟨𓉐⟩ (a house) representing [b] because “house” in those languages usually starts with that sound. That’s the start of the phonetic principle (graphemes represent sounds instead of concepts).

There’s yet another level of abstraction, that it’s hard to pinpoint when started to become relevant: instead of representing the “raw” sounds, you represent the underlying phonemes. It’s the reason, for example, that the /p/ in ⟨pit⟩ [pʰ] and ⟨spit⟩ [p] gets the same letter - because although they sound different, they’re still the same phoneme.

Now, there were a couple of problems with this early alphabet from the Greeks, there only had uppercase, and while they wrote in rows, sometimes they wrote LTR, sometimes RTL

Ah, come on, that’s silly - neither is a “problem” of the lapidary early Greek alphabet. It’s just the absence of a feature that he’s used to, and the presence of another.

For comparison: this is on the same level as an Arabic or Farsi speaker saying “now, there are a couple problems with the modern Latin alphabet, such as lack of initial/medial/final forms, and writing the vowels with their own letters as if they were consonants.”

Enter the Romans…

Further info on the alphabet. Be warned that it’s mostly trivia.

• ⟨G⟩ is a later innovation, more specifically from 230 BCE. Originally the Roman alphabet used ⟨C⟩ for both /k/ and /g/.
• Including ⟨J⟩ was a mistake - it was not a letter back then, it originated as a curled ⟨I⟩ in the middle ages. ⟨I⟩ and ⟨J⟩ got “split” into their own letters rather recently.
• ⟨U⟩ was not a letter back then either, but he got it right. Same deal with the above, except between ⟨V⟩ and ⟨U⟩.
• ⟨K⟩ was only marginally used. You do see it popping up for native Latin words, but it’s usually for Greek borrowings. Specially after Latin shifted /k/ to sound like [tʃ] (as in chill) before front vowels.
• ⟨Y⟩ was mostly used for Greek borrowings, representing the sounds [ʏ y:] (as in German Müller and über). Latin itself lacked the sound, and odds are that most speakers butchered those words to sound like [ɪ i:] (as in bit and beet) instead.
• ⟨W⟩ is not there because, although ⟨V⟩ represented three sounds in Latin, [w ʊ u:] (as in wool, book and boot), confusing [w] with [ʊ] was not a big deal (more on [u:] later). It wrecked havoc for Germanic dialects though, so they started representing the consonant with a digraph, ⟨VV⟩.
• ⟨Z⟩ used to be the sixth letter of the alphabet. Then it was kicked off the alphabet for being “too foreign”. Then it came back at the end.
• Some Roman emperor tried to introduce three letters into the alphabet: ⟨Ↄ Ⅎ Ⱶ⟩, that were supposed to represent [ps w ɨ] (as in cops, wool, and Polish byt). They were mostly forgotten.
• The Romans used a diacritic, to represent vowel length, the apex. For most time it looked like its descendant (the modern acute), except over ⟨I⟩ - because then people wrote a longer ⟨I⟩ instead.

Pros: no fanning/bellowing
Cons: needs a stool to reach the chimney

…this channel is a treat. He made a natural draft furnace 6y ago, and with this one the improvements are visible - addressing short-circuit drafts, stronger airflow due to parallel tuyeres, and apparently far more yield. (Back then he got no iron from the slag around the tuyere.)

9:45, on the “universal social network”: this can’t be stressed enough.

No matter how much Musk babbles about “I wanr an errything app! lol lmao”, Twitter won’t become one. The Fediverse however has the potential to become an all-encompassing social network, with different aspects of online interaction being integrated organically.

There’s a future not too far away where you can share a picture, from an account that you made for video sharing, that’ll get a lot of microblogging toots and spark a discussion in a forum. This would be impossible using Instagram, Youtube, Twitter or Reddit; but once the interfaces get ironed out, it will become reality for PixelFed, Piped, Mastodon, Lemmy and Kbin.

TL;DW*: a fight between “we’re developing AGI, and it’ll doom us!” vs. “we’re developing AGI, and it’ll make us rich!”. With both sides assuming that they’re actually developing something smarter than a parrot (nope) that thinks that oranges are passive and potatoes are active.

*I actually watched it. I’m a sucker for drama.

Ghostery does work as an ad blocker too, and advertises (eh) itself as such.

Plus, for corporate nowadays, tracking and advertisement are two steps of the same process.

As the other poster said, it’s on F-Droid. It’s mostly a Youtube frontend, although it accesses SoundCloud and PeerTube too. And more importantly, it doesn’t download advertisements from YT, so you don’t even need an ad blocker when using it.

The ad blockers in question were AdGuard and Ghostery, acc. to the article.
uBlock Origin is still working fine for me. And NewPipe in the cell phone.

That doesn’t surprise me.

Linux users are biased towards higher technical expertise, and they have a different mindset - most of the software that we use is the result of collaborative projects, and we’re often encouraged to help the devs out. And while the collaborative situation might not be true for game development, the mindset leaks out.

Even if this wasn’t Elon Musk, the very idea of your boss having control over your finances sounds dumb as a brick.

[Musk] "And for some reason PayPal, once it became eBay, not only did they not implement the rest of the list, but they actually rolled back a bunch of key features, which is crazy. So PayPal is actually a less complete product than what we came up with in July of 2000, so 23 years ago.”

“And for some reason not only they didn’t implement a lot of my stupid ideas, but they reverted some of my dumbest takes that still went through. And 23 years later I still didn’t learn.”

I think that’s neither. The whole thing boils down for me to an adult trying to strike a deal with a kid so the kid gives up their ice cream, the kid saying “no!”, and then the adult still grabbing the ice cream by force.

In other words I think that Meta run some risk assessment on the move, and decided that it was still profitable.

I think that the other user is conveying something like this:

“If you’re in a community you don’t need to know something, as long as someone else knows it. And if enough people know it, you escape being manipulated by external players.”