I do not give them any money as I do not use their service in any form. However, there are a few reasons you may want to if you do use their services.

1. If you enjoy the service it is indeed in your interest that it is profitable and keeps on working.
2. You’re saving yourself on installing on your phone a cracked application which likely contains some malware.
3. If you dislike Spotify for what they do and how they behave, you’re better off not using the service altogether.

And I mean, they do offer you a way to listen to music for free anyway, they just have you listen to some advertisement. It is a fair exchange in my opinion. The pricing of their subscription is also fair in my opinion, it’s some 10-15€/month and you can listen to all the music you want all the time, that is about the price of a single disc. If you don’t like the advertisement and don’t want to pay to listen, I’d turn to Soulseek rather than trying to use their service for free.

I myself prefer to have my own music collection and to buy the music from musicians I like, but I do see the advantages of a service like Spotify and I feel it is pretty cool that they offer their huge catalogue for free to anyone in the world.

If you use Spotify, I’d pay for the subscription. If you don’t want to pay for the subscription, I would download the music so that you have it on your phone.

As a computational chemist, I agree: a lot of computational chemistry studies are useless and just a bunch of calculations on a molecule nobody cares about and that will never be synthesized. In most cases, computational chemists get a good result, publish a paper and then delete the files and forget about it because now they have something else to calculate, generally the information of such results will never reach a laboratory. Then there is the other part of computational chemistry: calculating stuff that has already been determined experimentally. For… Reasons. Just a couple days ago I reviewed a paper of this kind: very nice setup, good calculations and so on. Then I went to check the list of molecules they used, and they had experimental results for every one of them. Mind you, they were not testing the computational methods for accuracy, they were genuinely trying to predict those values…

Well anyway, I’ll go look my 50 GPUs burn now.

I don’t care at all about DE, as long as it is not gnome. I run vanilla kde with minimal configuration. I tried many DEs through the years, tiling wm and so on. Now I just want something that works and that I don’t worry about. But gnome, I don’t get it. I did try it a couple years ago and my colleagues at work use it, it feels like it is hindering me. I don’t like how the application switcher works, the software launcher and so on. When I use it it feels to me I’m fighting the UI in order to do very simple things.

I had to stop: it was becoming an expensive vice. In the end cocaine is much cheaper than eating high quality tomatoes every day.

If you have a healthy life style and eat well, it does not matter what you place into your salad. Not that I ever did put anything too caloric in a salad, I guess there was a period in which I added yogurt, but I wouldn’t feel bad if I wanted something caloric in there. Hell, I’d like to be rich and afford various types of nuts to throw into a salad.

Friendly reminder that Parmesan generally refers to an American counterfeit product. Please refer to the cheese as Parmigiano.

I Say this because the US seems very proud of producing counterfeit products and wants to maintain a monopoly on such goods https://en.edairynews.com/us-blasts-eu-for-monopoly-on-south-america-dairy-meat/

I don’t understand. I’m pretty sure raising a child depends on the choices of the parents. What do you mean, that in areas with higher population density it is easier to get fresh food? And that thus the parent’s choices are not influential or only possible because of the environment? In my experience fresh food is more accessible in low population density areas, thus I don’t really follow.

So what? Everyone who understands how things work knowns that dogs meow when placed inside black holes.

You can spend your entire life thinking about it and you Will never reach a definitive answer. Or, you can spend a day to set up an experiment and throw a party.

While I do agree in general, Open ai is not a public company. Valuation logics of private companies are quite different than stock market.

I guess if I were an artist I’d look at this and feel justified suing Spotify for 1 billion dollars for the lack of protection of my music.

Not only genius mathematicians, we have good examples of genius biologist with Kary Mullis. Though to be fair I’d much rather live in the same city of Kary Mullis, I’d probably enjoy a beer with the guy every once in a while.

Thank you for the resource. I’m unsure as to why my comment above was removed as I received no notification about it and nobody gave me an explanation. I’ll start by saying that my field of research is quite different from social sciences and that I am absolutely not an expert regarding transgender people: I am not one and I only have few friends that are. I have not read the articles from the authors mentioned in this thread, I do not know whether their research is sound or not, @daannii above was saying their research is sound and I take it at face value; but the following stands even if that is not the case.

The review you linked does not appear to address these issues that are being discussed in here. They do find that gender transition tends to be positive and that in most cases people do not regret doing it.

4. Regrets following gender transition are extremely rare and have become even rarer as both surgical techniques and social support have improved. Pooling data from numerous studies demonstrates a regret rate ranging from .3 percent to 3.8 percent. Regrets are most likely to result from a lack of social support after transition or poor surgical outcomes using older techniques.

However this does not seem to address differences across demographics, such as could be transitioning when minor vs transitioning when adult. It would be interesting to know whether people who transition as child tend to have higher regret rates than adults.

We eliminated studies, for instance, that did not assess the outcomes of gender transition, that investigated minors instead of adults

In fact they specify in the methodology that they specifically did not address research involving minors and they excluded any paper that investigated minors.

Littmans research aims to discover which trans teens will continue being trans and which will flip back to their biological based gender.

This statement from above does make sense to me. I would not see one such research as damaging towards anyone. I don’t see how that is bias. In the review you provided is stated that some people, a vast minority, do regret transitioning. I don’t see how identifying those people before they do transition would be bad.

It’s not science. It’s bias, wearing a veneer of science

That could very much be, as I said I did not read the articles from the authors above. But the review you refer to does not disprove any of their findings. Moreover it is an article that I would never myself reference. I am from a different field of study and probably we do systematic reviews in a different way, but if I was one of the peer reviews I’d be asking a major revision. This is not a scientific publication: it is not reviewed by anyone for what I can tell. They do at the very least show the methodology on how they selected the papers, which is nice, but they do not explain at all how they analyzed and reviewed the papers. This would at most classify as a review article and not a systematic review in any authoritative journal. They have no quantitative analysis of the papers, besides number of papers with negative results and only give some qualitative analysis of the aggregate results without justifying how they got to such conclusions. I’m not saying the results are incorrect or that their research is wrong, but there is also no way to verify it is, since they do not provide that fundamental information which would be required in any peer review process. It is nevertheless a good read as a piece of diffusion, to inform people who are not actively working in the field.

Here’s what the science actually says

Given that, this statement feels a bit out of place.

I am unsure on what was your point. It is very possible that the authors of this survey are not doing a good survey or that they are manipulating results, but then you should point that out rather than another (bad) piece of research which does not address the main point of the conversation.

Removed by mod

As far as I can see it has not been updated and someone is working on it. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2355938 Why does it matter for you to have version 2.0 anyway? As far as I understand it is interoperable with previous versions. At least, I didn’t have any problems until now.

I wouldn’t use Arab springs as an example of why Facebook is not a good product. Facebook has many problems and misuses, but I would not list allowing people to organise as one of them.

I didn’t even know syncthing 2 was released. As a service type of software I don’t really care too much for new features, I want it to be stable. Judging from this thread it wasn’t really stable until a couple months ago: https://forum.syncthing.net/t/syncthing-2-0-august-2025/24758/30

I guess I’m fine with that. Software for which I need the latest release I wouldn’t install from package manager anyway.

I used to mess a lot on my Linux system, now I just want it to work and not have to change anything. Still on default plasma config after years, I guess I just mess with my vim config and little else.

An article about it is very much appreciated. It’s difficult to see things coming when there is no information available.

Same, i have lossy compression; but I favour opus.