We are excited to announce that F-Droid has been awarded $396,044 from theOpen Technology Fund’s FOSS SustainabilityFund.This grant is specifically designed ...
I swear this community is as bad as a flat earth one when the government gets brought up. why change the title from the original to imply that congress (other than deciding the federal budget) had anything to do with it? That is at best irresponsible and misleading and at worst actively malicious. Yes government entities do sketchy things, but that does not mean something can’t be trusted because a government entity interacted with it.
Well said. And I think there’s more. In the Anglosphere and the USA in particular, government and state are often conflated, but they really are two different things. The former is the cockpit, the latter is the airplane.
Things are different in European cultures. In Latin languages, for example, the government is understood to be the body of politicians in control right now, whereas the state is a sort of expression of the people’s will and therefore has much wider legitimacy. Two very different things. I believe it’s similar in German.
I sometimes wonder if this semantic quirk has exacerbated the general skepticism of English-speakers towards collective action.
As I mentioned, I felt it was more transparent to say where the money comes from and let people draw their own conclusions. Of course there will always be dissenting opinions no matter which title is used, I think that just comes with the territory, and I’m ok with that; I don’t think there is a single right or wrong answer. I’m sorry that you disagree with my choice. I encourage you to make similar posts wherever you’d like with your own desired title.
it isn’t more accurate though, you are lying about where the funding came from. congress only approved the budget for the government, they didn’t have a say in who got the money that was being handed out. there is a single right answer and it is to not change the titles of news articles to suit your own opinions. if you want to present your opinion, you do it by making your own post. posting a news article is for sharing the article, not for lying about it’s contents to suit the story you want to tell.
The only “territory” that deliberately manipulating a title comes with is that of misinformation. For what other reason would another application be wedged in? Why are other grants left out? It’s all very plain.
Yeah, if strong emotions were such a liability then we probably wouldn’t have them anymore. Emotions aren’t vestigial or useless or contrary to rational discourse, they’re an integral part of what it means to be sentient and sapient, and they can be incredibly useful when doing things that are decidedly “rational.” I can tell that some code I wrote is shit because it “feels wrong” a hell of a lot faster than I can by logically reasoning it out.
I’m hoping that quote is simply lacking context. The alternative is that the people behind the quote are just fucking insufferable.
intelligence has nothing to do with empathy or humility, it is a measure of knowledge and problem-solving. lying about the contents of posts and pretending you are justified is not intelligent, even if you add a quote.
OTF receives the majority of its funding from the U.S. government via the U.S. Agency for Global Media (USAGM). Funding is appropriated for OTF through the annual Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs appropriations and provided to OTF via a grant agreement from USAGM.
For FY 2023, Congress allocated $90.5 million for programs to promote Internet freedom globally, representing a $13 million increase from FY 2022. Of the funds allocated for Internet freedom, $40 million was designated for OTF. Per the appropriations, all Congressional funding provided to OTF is used to support “programs to promote Internet freedom globally.” In addition to helping to further OTF’s mission, this funding increase is also further recognition of the increasing need for the tools and technologies OTF supports.
In addition to funding from USAGM, OTF also accepts funding from other mission-aligned donors for discrete Funds, Labs, or Fellowships. For example, OTF’s FOSS Sustainability Fund is supported in part by funding from Schmidt Futures’ Plaintext Group, Okta for Good, and the Github Foundation.
I swear this community is as bad as a flat earth one when the government gets brought up. why change the title from the original to imply that congress (other than deciding the federal budget) had anything to do with it? That is at best irresponsible and misleading and at worst actively malicious. Yes government entities do sketchy things, but that does not mean something can’t be trusted because a government entity interacted with it.
Well said. And I think there’s more. In the Anglosphere and the USA in particular, government and state are often conflated, but they really are two different things. The former is the cockpit, the latter is the airplane.
Things are different in European cultures. In Latin languages, for example, the government is understood to be the body of politicians in control right now, whereas the state is a sort of expression of the people’s will and therefore has much wider legitimacy. Two very different things. I believe it’s similar in German.
I sometimes wonder if this semantic quirk has exacerbated the general skepticism of English-speakers towards collective action.
I understand that “Regierung” (government) = executive branch “Parlament” (parliament, in the US congress+senate) = legislative branch
“Staat” (state) is an imprecise word as it can mean different things https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staat https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_(polity) (see Definition)
As I mentioned, I felt it was more transparent to say where the money comes from and let people draw their own conclusions. Of course there will always be dissenting opinions no matter which title is used, I think that just comes with the territory, and I’m ok with that; I don’t think there is a single right or wrong answer. I’m sorry that you disagree with my choice. I encourage you to make similar posts wherever you’d like with your own desired title.
Thank you for your perspective.
it isn’t more accurate though, you are lying about where the funding came from. congress only approved the budget for the government, they didn’t have a say in who got the money that was being handed out. there is a single right answer and it is to not change the titles of news articles to suit your own opinions. if you want to present your opinion, you do it by making your own post. posting a news article is for sharing the article, not for lying about it’s contents to suit the story you want to tell.
The only “territory” that deliberately manipulating a title comes with is that of misinformation. For what other reason would another application be wedged in? Why are other grants left out? It’s all very plain.
I think real intelligence by definition requires empathy and humility, which is typically the opposite of such dogmatism in my opinion.
“As a rule, strong feelings about issues do not emerge from deep understanding.” -Sloman and Fernbach
My feelings about capitalism are largely fueled by how well I understand it. When I understood it less, I didn’t mind it as much
I don’t like this quote
Yeah, if strong emotions were such a liability then we probably wouldn’t have them anymore. Emotions aren’t vestigial or useless or contrary to rational discourse, they’re an integral part of what it means to be sentient and sapient, and they can be incredibly useful when doing things that are decidedly “rational.” I can tell that some code I wrote is shit because it “feels wrong” a hell of a lot faster than I can by logically reasoning it out.
I’m hoping that quote is simply lacking context. The alternative is that the people behind the quote are just fucking insufferable.
intelligence has nothing to do with empathy or humility, it is a measure of knowledge and problem-solving. lying about the contents of posts and pretending you are justified is not intelligent, even if you add a quote.
Well you failed because it comes from the taxpayer.