I won’t deny that, I’m rocking a ThinkPad T from 2019 which I love. But I’m on the market for a new one just to get back some peace of mind as it may run out of life at this point, and it would be silly not to see the advantages of lunar lake and LPDDR5 for battery life. Only the price be damned.
It’s 2026, you need to win the lottery to buy a laptop.
haut-vote parce que c’est vrai, et my bad, mon lien inclue en effet le scope 3. Si on se restreint à Scope 1+2, on trouve les mêmes majors du pétrole, entourées de quelques cimenteries, aciéries, et entreprises étatiques de production d’électricité crade. Sauce.
On peut dire que Total est responsable d’énormément d’émissions, mais les émissions sont surtout faites par les clients qui font plein.
Non, de la façon dont c’est comptabilisé, Total est responsable d’énormément d’émissions, parce qu’ils émettent énormément. Les émissions des clients ne sont pas prises en compte. Un exemple.
This data is used to quantify the direct production-linked operational emissions and emissions from the combustion of marketed products that can be attributed to these entities.
Un argument tout à fait recevable est de dire que la production d’hydrocarbures relâche nécessairement des hydrocarbures dans l’atmosphère, c’est vrai en pratique, mais ce n’est pas une fatalité, ou en tout cas pas dans les proportions actuelles, faisant que les majors privilégiant le rendement financier de leurs installations au profit du rendement climatique (une unité de production qui capte et stocke le CO₂ coûte plus cher à fabriquer et à opérer, les premiers temps de mise en opération relâchent énormément de CO₂ à la torchère, un système de re-pressurisation du puits par les gaz indésirables est souvent possible mais complexe, etc) est in-fine un choix politique.
Quels comportements ? 100 entreprises sont responsables de 70% des émissions, 32 entreprises (souvent étatiques, dans les énergies fossiles), de 50% des émissions. Je me déplace en vélo et mange beaucoup plus de légumes que de viande, mais à un moment il faut arrêter la déconne, qui est de faire porter le chapeau aux individus, excepté si l’on parle des milliardaires et groupes d’influence qui lobbient contre l’action climatique.
I don’t think you know what a web app is.
I don’t think YOU do? A web app is an app built with web technologies and running in a browser. Which is also the case of Discord desktop (an electron app, i.e. Chrome).
Really? So I can message EA users with my MOVIM account? No? Well there’s a problem…
Again, you don’t seem to understand very much how any of this works. It’s pretty much the equivalent of saying “your devices at home are not using the tcp/ip protocol because I can’t ping your smart tv from the internet”. Actually, they do, but whoever operates the router (the XMPP server in this analogy) chose to make it this way. And yes, there is another way: for most of its history, GTalk was letting you connect to their XMPP server with the client of your choice, and talk to anyone else on the XMPP network besides accounts on @gmail.com. Federation is a built-in capability of the protocol that server admins may enable or not.
You can’t just label arguments you don’t like or agree with as “bad faith”. I have no motivation to hate on XMPP or promote Fluxer, other than liking one and disliking the other.
This is the extent of your argumentation:
it’s pretty clear by now that if you had any ability to comment meaningfully on this, you would have done it by now.
And importantly, my posts are a criticism of Fluxer. All I’m saying is “if you believe that you have the chops to develop a good client for a chat system, and you want it to eventually be self-hostable and federated, save yourself many years of suffering and do it on top of XMPP. Or at least if you don’t, take a good dive through it and come on the other side with a good story as to why your system is so much better. Showing mastery of the problem space will be free advertisement”.
I am talking about XMPP being almost 3 decades old
This is not the win you think it is.
It is not the win YOU think it is. So far you haven’t been able to cite a single specific issue with the protocol or universal flaws with clients. Get to terms with it: you are spreading FUD. Or make a real, substantiated case that supports your point.
Movim doesn’t even have a client at all, its just a PWA, which is a really poor experience.
Can’t wait until you realise discord is essentially the same thing :-) . Yup, it’s a web app. Always has.
You just come across as someone who doesn’t know much about the subject.
I don’t, and I shouldn’t need to. Good software doesn’t require vast amounts of research, you just use it.
People are using WhatsApp by the billions, which is essentially a stripped-down XMPP running on an ancient fork of ejabberd (there are many other examples of widespread use of XMPP: it props up your android notifications, it runs the nintendo switch network, EA/Riot games in-app chats are clients for it, etc).
But, nobody ever said that you need to research XMPP to use it. Only to have a sensible and articulated commentary in good faith. Which once again you fail at doing.
Then it’s even worse: if the goal is this, why give up on almost 3 decades of expertise solving that very problem?
I have no idea what you’re talking about.
I am talking about XMPP being almost 3 decades old and having gained a TON of experience and clever protocol design in the process. XMPP survived multiple generations of messaging apps (ICQ, AIM, Yahoo, MSN, Skype, GTalk, …)
In the way of usability. XMPP is actually a hodgepodge of different protocols sewn together and inconsistent across apps and servers.
Don’t believe all the disinformation you read online. XMPP is a IETF standard. It is extensible, and that’s the pragmatic take: in a federated environment, you can’t impose clients and servers to run identical versions, and so the protocol is versioned and contain fallbacks for all the major features. To help implementers cut through legacy extensions, there are compatibility suites that are revisited every few years or so. You will see that, the minute Fluxer goes self-hosted and federated (if ever), this clever extensibility will be dearly missed (we saw enough of that already with Matrix).
Moreover, XMPP has multiple independent client AND servers implementations, written in distinct languages. This guarantees that no actor can single-handedly take-over the ecosystem (a big risk with Fluxer, and many alternatives), and creates a fertile ground for innovation.
Fluxer has many many features that XMPP does not offer. If you’re familiar with Discord, you already know what those are.
If that’s so obvious, perhaps you could cite some? Did you even look into recent movim versions?
You cornered yourself into precisely NOT being able to invoke existing client shortcomings.
Again, no idea what you’re talking about.
You drove the discussion towards criticisms of the protocol, which is not the same thing as how clients implement it. In other words, you can’t simply say “XMPP sucks because this unmaintained client is ugly”.
No, because as I’ve already explained, XMPP is terrible.
XMPP deserves some fair criticism (like anything else having reached the real world and a substantial user-base), but that’s not one. You just come across as someone who doesn’t know much about the subject.
Then it’s even worse: if the goal is this, why give up on almost 3 decades of expertise solving that very problem? It’s a very complex one, believe it or not, and you can be sure that Fluxer won’t eyeball it in one shot, especially since federation is admittedly an afterthought and not baked in the design.
XMPP is terrible by comparison
In which way, exactly? You cornered yourself into precisely NOT being able to invoke existing client shortcomings. Protocol-wise, you would be surprised to learn how ubiquitous XMPP is even today, and for very good and practical reasons.
In all seriousness, Fluxer should just have been another XMPP client, purposely built for discord refugees. It would have gotten ahead faster by not reinventing a complex wheel, offered from the get go those characteristics (self hosting and federation) that are far-away roadmap items, and probably gained goodwill and many users in the process.
Time will tell, of course, but the internet history is riddled with failed messengers which bit more they could chew, the odds are not in Fluxer’s favour for one.
Another centralised system. By that simple definition, it will eventually turn against its users, like discord (or worse). Run away (ideally towards federated systems, XMPP with Movim is decent, and improving fast in areas that seem to matter to discord users, with EU funds, Matrix is another one)
That’ll work until they create for themselves new competitors that are good enough at previous (normal) market prices. And you don’t need incredible high foundry tech for that, so it’s closing up on them eventually.
No it’s not, and part of that is the current legislative laissez-faire in the US that put its regulatory bodies on a hiatus. Under normal circumstances, this stuff should have been under much more scrutiny and regulations. I’m not saying that the state should control what LLMs do or who’s access to them, but they could very much tackle the deceptive marketing, environmental and societal impact, unsound financing, abnormal market consolidation, and mitigate the overall financial risk.
I mean, unless you’ve got a hardware accelerator (which won’t be a thing before multiple years from AV2’s release, and possibly more due to its complexity), it will be measurably much worse than current codecs.
Ballsy of you to assume that it got “easier for normies”, the answer probably lies in asking “easier for what?”. Computers have been redefined as consumption devices in a scheme to extract maximal profit out of their captive users. So it’s certainly “easy” for a growing number of users baited into dark patterns to hand over their credit card details and get addicted to antisocial networks and whatnot. But using modern devices as traditional computers, with intent, as a productive tool? It got much harder, except maybe for the Linux users, normies and “geeks” alike.
I still have mine, it’s a decent audiobook player for the kids, it even has a jack, a replaceable battery, induction charging and is so nimble. And did I mention the full keyboard? I hate that we followed Apple design ideals, for the sake of having today overpowered dumb, heavy , fragile and inconvenient consumption-only bricks.
It doesn’t make any sense for large group chats: there’s just no secrecy to them. And that will cut you off from desired capabilities like server-side search. Not that I think that Zulip makes any sense in general when there are federated protocols that work and scale as well, but that’s another discussion.
I use my Trilium instance (notes-taking app, PKMS, …) for that kind of stuff: https://triliumnotes.org/
You can have a journal with day notes following a template with data-entry forms, which makes weight/mood/location/whatever tracker very easy to keep track of as a routine.
Is that another overpowered smartphone SoC running a wasteful android with a thin UI and dumbed-down music player? If so, let me just repurpose an old smartphone and save the planet from some e-waste. If not, kudos.
Not trying to convince anyone or to rationalize my own irrationality here but I’d rather have a working laptop to transfer from than a dead one, and with the fast increasing prices of components, the best time for a new laptop is either yesterday or after the AI bubble eventually pops and the market re-adjusts (I wouldn’t bet the latter to take less than a couple years neither my current laptop to survive this long).
Buying second hand also means passing on Panther Lake, and LPDDR5, so a fast laptop is one thing, but with the goal of keeping it 8 years or so like the current one, efficiency is as important if not more. Efficiency figures are quite striking (and in the 60%): https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2026/07/framework-laptop-13-pro-review-much-better-battery-much-worse-price/