How do the emojis get selected/assigned?

i’ve posted some links in !emoji@lemmy.ml about that

you have posted only two comments on lemmy so far, and both are telling people to buy this phone. do you have any affiliation with it, and/or are you planning to continue using your lemmy account solely to encourage people to buy it?

also, since you seem to know about this, i am curious if you can enlighten me: are there any benefits of iodéOS compared with LineageOS which it is a derivative of? i didn’t find a comparison between them on the website.

imo this (.world link) is a better choice

In the prime timeline (the one where the Bell Riots and Irish Unification both occurred in 2024) the seahorse emoji was added in Unicode 12.0 (in 2019), but in this timeline none of these events have occurred yet.

See here and here for more information.

the guy in the middle is a pro at photobombing

deleted by creator

yep

the metadata isn’t

instructions unclear. is it rue as in the herb ruta graveolens or rue as in the archaic noun meaning sorrow / repentance / regret / pity / compassion?

Python does have a year option that they are not using.

No, it doesn’t:

Help on class timedelta in module datetime:

class timedelta(builtins.object)
 |  Difference between two datetime values.
 |
 |  timedelta(days=0, seconds=0, microseconds=0, milliseconds=0, minutes=0, hours=0, weeks=0)
 |
 |  All arguments are optional and default to 0.
 |  Arguments may be integers or floats, and may be positive or negative.

Authorities don’t need to ask Signal for metadata; Signal promises they don’t log any themselves and that is probably true.

But, they outsource their server operation to Jeff Bezos, and then they do some absurd security theater to pretend that cryptography makes it so that the server (Amazon) couldn’t possibly log metadata - which is obviously false.

How to install Linux on a dead badger (written in 2004, might not work with modern distributions)

I regret to inform you that while that AP headline was real (it was in 2020) the quote above it originated on twitter.

today: “Bulgarian Prime Minister Rosen Zhelyazkov told parliament that the Commission president’s plane had not been disrupted but had only experienced a partial signal interruption, the kind typically seen in densely populated areas. […] But just hours later, the government again changed its position, with Zhelyazkov holding an impromptu news conference early afternoon to revert the official line to the electronic warfare happening in Ukraine once again.”

Thanks for pointing this out. Looking closer I see that that “journal” was definitely not something I want to be sending traffic to, for a whole bunch of reasons - besides anti-vax they’re also anti-trans, and they’re gold bugs… and they’re asking tough questions like “do viruses exist” 🤡

I edited the post to link to MIT instead, and added a note in the post body explaining why.

This blog post has some details about the bad reporting around this story (claiming they used paper maps, and that they were circling for an hour) but it ultimately does agree that the “some issue with the GPS” reported by the pilot (the post includes radio recordings from the air and again from the ground after landing where the pilot says “GPS issues”) must in fact be some type of GPS interference.

Meanwhile flightradar24 says “Yes, and we’re also saying there is no evidence of spoofing. There are numerous issues that could have affected the crew’s ability to perform a GPS-based approach that aren’t related to jamming or spoofing.”

🤷

ADS-B is quite far away from GPS frequencies, so yeah.

ADS-B packets include coordinates from GPS as well as several values related to the estimated accuracy of said coordinates (which is how flightradar24 is reporting that they had good GPS signal throughout the flight).

Creative commons has a non commercial license.

The Creative Commons website explains why licenses which use their non-commercial or no-derivatives clauses are non-free.

In 2009, seven years after they released their licenses, they did a study which found that users and creators have substantially varied understandings about which types of uses are prohibited and allowed by the NC clause.

For instance, an NC work can be included in third parties’ YouTube videos which Google might put advertisements on (as long as the uploaders don’t monetize the video themselves), but the work cannot be included in Wikipedia (because contributions to Wikipedia must be freely licensed, which means allowing commercial use).

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons_NonCommercial_license