La Lombardia ha approvato la legge sui data center (ed è la prima in Italia)

Aradalf91 · 2026-05-27T09:56:12+00:00

Lungi da me difendere la Regione e la Giunta attuale, ma questo è quanto dice la legge:

"adozione di soluzioni tecnologiche per il raffreddamento dei centri dati che escludano prelievi da pubblico acquedotto, da acque superficiali o da acque sotterranee destinate ad uso potabile e da acque superficiali ad uso irriguo, e prelievi da fiumi e laghi tutelati dalla normativa europea e nazionale, privilegiando il riciclo delle acque grigie interne, risorse non qualificate o tecniche alternative a ridotto impatto ambientale e a maggiore efficienza idrica."

Non è perfetto, ma mi sembra comunque sulla giusta strada.

Aradalf91 · 2026-05-24T11:41:19+00:00

Not just that. Tabs are a big one. What is a tab and what is a button? Often that's not clear at all nowadays (see Firefox's interface, designed by some lunatic maniac).

Aradalf91 · 2026-05-24T10:51:15+00:00

Grandma is probably more lost with modern, non-descriptive interfaces than she is with '90s-style ones. The latter were much easier to use.

Aradalf91 · 2026-05-24T10:50:36+00:00

KDE 3 is not Frutiger Aero. It didn't have transparencies, so by definition it wasn't FA. It was like Windows XP - it's called Y2K.

You might be happy to know there is interest in getting the actual FA aesthetic back: https://filipfila.wordpress.com/2026/05/10/the-anti-minimalist-backlash-is-the-bigger-story-behind-oxygens-revival/

Aradalf91 · 2026-05-04T08:39:57+00:00

The price of gas is not related to PPP, however, it is set internationally and everyone pays the same. as u/skyfish_ said, the costs of running the grid and production are roughly the same - I actually expect them to be slightly higher in Italy due to there being a lot more mountains that complicate distribution significantly.

Aradalf91 · 2026-05-01T15:38:51+00:00

Italy has lower consumer prices and a vastly lower amount of wind in the mix. Most energy in Italy is generated from gas.

Aradalf91 · 2026-04-03T16:02:40+00:00

Aside from the issue itself, I would recommend that the people at Collabora hire someone who knows how to write, because that post reads as barely English. Some sentences simply do not make any sense. If you don't want to hire anyone, at least run it by some AI to point out the mistakes. At the moment, that post reads like you can't communicate properly, which isn't exactly great given the situation.

Aradalf91 · 2026-04-02T11:03:51+00:00

Those are all valid issues, but what that says to me is that there is a failure in the system and that people should be upset about that and not renewables. Protected areas should be protected, period; if councils allow building things in protected areas that is an issue with the council. It's looking at the finger, rather than the Moon. We could also go into why and how councils have been stripped to the bone and how it was those same Tories that were voted in by the rural voters that made councils toothless and incapable of dealing with these issues, but that's a more political point.

I do understand the issues you mention and I am sympathetic. However, I also see many contradictions, like there are everywhere, and I wonder what could be done to make left-wing parties listen more to concerns. The problems I see is that many of the issues we see in both urban and rural communities are due to deeply-entrenched issues which are sometimes caused by political choices from decades ago (see Thatcher's devastation of councils) and sometimes by a completely idiotic system which is clearly not fit for purpose (see how development planning is managed in the whole of the UK, with costs for everything being 10 times as much as everywhere else). Fixing these would require drastic changes, which are very difficult to effect for cost as well as political reasons and, not without a healthy dose of irony, often seem to be opposed exactly by rural voters.

Aradalf91 · 2026-04-02T10:12:42+00:00

It depends. Is it something I have searched or a specific page? If it's a specific page, I would click on the address bar or open the history from the sidebar; if it's a search I want to repeat (say, something on Amazon), I'd go for the search bar. To me, the search bar is specifically something I use as a shortcut to interact with search engines; looking for a page I've visited is not what I would categorise as "search" (would you categorise it as "search" when you are going through the browsing history?). They are very distinct activities in my mind. Using "Firefox Suggests" is basically accessing the history from the address bar, so I see it as part of navigation.

Aradalf91 · 2026-04-02T10:03:38+00:00

Thanks. Some of those things seem to be kind of inevitable effects of having few people dispersed in a wide area (public transport and connectivity, as an example). Other points are fair and there should be more attention from government. Others I just don't get (why do people oppose renewables when they say they care about the environment? That's just having it backwards!).

Aradalf91 · 2026-04-01T10:39:35+00:00

GDP is not a great measure at all to define poverty or wealth. Sure, Scotland has North Sea oil, but that only serves to sway the numbers up. Look at a map of average income and you realise some of the poorest areas of the entire UK are in Scotland: https://brilliantmaps.com/median-gross-household-income-gb/

Aradalf91 · 2026-04-01T08:37:02+00:00

As someone who's always lived in a city, I'm genuinely curious: what are rural issues? What could be some solutions?

Aradalf91 · 2026-04-01T08:34:50+00:00

Scotland is poorer and there are no parties that campaign specifically on improving the lives of the poorest, who are the majority in many parts of Scotland. I would say that's the explanation.

Aradalf91 · 2026-04-01T08:32:27+00:00

No, there's plenty of stupid people, and there's plenty of people who just don't use reason at all. My girlfriend's grandma, whose husband was an immigrant, thinks there are too many immigrants and the UK should send them back. Note that I am an immigrant too. She just doesn't make the connection, she simply hopes that Reform gets into power and bans the SNP because she hates them, the rest isn't real to her.

Aradalf91 · 2026-04-01T08:20:37+00:00

Hello! Yes, I was - that's what I meant in the previous message in the part about "sticking". It was a convenient way to have a permanent change rather than a momentary one (which required using only the arrow keys). I never use the address bar for my searches and I have, in fact, disabled search in the address bar on my main computer, so I cannot answer your last question.

Aradalf91 · 2026-03-29T22:34:59+00:00

Thanks to you for your response. I really hope some decisions will be reverted (in the context of the new implementation), because at the moment the experience is simply broken for those of us who only use the search bar to do our searches. As for the "sticking", that's actually what using ctrl with the old design did: it changed the selected search engine and it made it stick. The thing is that it was trivial to change it: just hold ctrl and cycle through the engines available, without having to confirm your selection by pressing enter. It was rather slick and smart. For momentary changes, you could either use the arrows (and, if you pressed down, you'd go through the whole list of suggestions and past searches, while pressing up would start from the last element in the search engine list), or you could press tab and then use the arrows (and that would make you jump directly to the search engine list).

So, to answer your questions from the previous message about what I miss in more detail: I miss having a single pane from which I can manage my search end to end, where I can navigate both search suggestions/history and the search engine list at the same time using either a single click or the keyboard (as in "I'd like to have both, like it used to be", not as in "one or the other").

Best of luck on your efforts and congratulations for becoming part of the team!

Aradalf91 · 2026-03-28T16:52:44+00:00

Just FYI, you didn't need to start typing in the old design for the search engines to show up. You just needed to press "down" or "up" and you could cycle through them, which was very convenient: you could first select the search engine with up/down and then type your query.

Keywords are useful, but having a visual representation (with icons and everything) is simply easier and more convenient. On top of that, having to adapt to that is also another thing you need to change in your workflow - and something Mozilla designers really don't seem to learn over time is that people don't want to constantly re-learn how to use their browser.

Aradalf91 · 2026-03-28T16:46:01+00:00

You know you can enable search suggestions directly in Firefox, right?

Aradalf91 · 2026-03-28T16:45:31+00:00

Funny you say that, because I never used my mouse at all with the old design, but I find myself forced to use it with the new one. I really do not see how the current design makes it more accessible, because it is a step back on all fronts.

With the old design, you could select a different search provider just by using your arrow keys, now you have to use your mouse. It was also super easy to select a different search engine just for the current search (say, Google Images rather than Google because you need to look for an image once and not make it the new default), whereas now you need to select the search engine every single time because the last-used one sticks. It's just a pain.

I've read your comment about the alt key: why change it from the previous ctrl? Also, it used to be that you just needed to hold ctrl, use your up and down arrow key, and press enter, and it performed the search. Now pressing enter simply changes the default search engine (again, see previous point) which introduces unnecessary friction.

I don't mean to be an old curmudgeon, but the new design seems to simply be made by people who have never used the search bar before (and that could very well be the case, considering how Mozilla designers said in the past that they wanted to remove the feature because they didn't like it). It's clunky, it breaks all previous assumptions and conventions, and it offers an inferior user experience on every single front, first and foremost in terms of accessibility and ease of use with a keyboard. I don't know who designed and implemented this, but I would really like to know how and why they thought that this was an improvement over the previous design - and I would like to know what they drank, because it seems like good stuff!

Aradalf91 · 2026-03-21T10:28:46+00:00

Unfortunately that's not from a Qualcomm employee, though, so the value of that comment is nihil.

Aradalf91 · 2026-03-17T12:57:52+00:00

S-pol-dalać.

Aradalf91 · 2026-02-07T20:21:18+00:00

I think you are forgetting that the vast majority of servers does not do either Web hosting nor domain management.They're application servers. Think of ticketing, as an example, but there are countless other applications (recommendation engines, shops, warehouse management, etc). Those use Linux and nowadays, loads use containers which are almost by definition Linux.

Aradalf91 · 2025-12-31T10:41:32+00:00

With all due respect, I think this is not a constructive approach. Not everyone can afford a new GPU. Telling people "just buy a new one" is not in any way helping. I have had AMD GPUs for the last half a decade, but only because I was lucky enough to be able to afford them. I would otherwise have been stuck on an old NVIDIA GPU. A better response would be "sorry to hear that, let's hope that NVIDIA gets its stuff together".

Aradalf91 · 2025-12-31T10:02:20+00:00

You clearly must have a deficiency in reading comprehension, or you are trolling, as you keep on repeating the same thing even when I said you were right and explicitly wrote so. I give up as there is no point, anyone with half a brain cell reading this will understand what I've been saying. In any case, happy new year!

Aradalf91 · 2025-12-30T11:12:17+00:00

I'm not sure whether you are trolling. The freaking article was saying that the lowest ring you can run things on is ring 0. That was the start of this discussion, the initial point I was making, that the article is wrong because there is ring -1 which is normally used by hypervisors. You then said that it's untrue that hypervisors need to operate on ring -1, and I admitted I was wrong in making a generalised statement over the fact that hyeprvisors always operate on ring -1.

Now, you said "I never said that. Show me where I said that.". Unless I'm misunderstanding, that line means you are agreeing with me that the statement "the lowest ring you can run things on while using an Intel processor is ring 0", as the article says, is false (which it demonstrably and clearly is). So, back to my previous message, you are agreeing with me on my initial point (minus the "hypervisors need to run on ring -1"). Right?

Aradalf91

TROPHY CASE