Brasil

He stressed that protests were "nowhere near" the level required to deploy the troops.

Los Angeles Police Chief Jim McDonnell sharply countered Donald Trump’s claims that the city needed National Guard support, emphasizing Wednesday that protests were “nowhere near” that level.

McDonnell’s remarks come after Trump cited the police chief as validating the White House’s decision to send in troops to address largely peaceful protests over immigration raids.

When asked by CNN’s Kaitlan Collins if Trump had correctly described his position, McDonnell disputed the president’s statement.

“No, we were not in a position to request the National Guard,” he said. “We’re nowhere near a level where we would be reaching out to the governor for National Guard at this stage. And my hope is that things are going in the right direction now and that we wouldn’t have had to have done that, or we won’t either.”

cross-posted from: https://slrpnk.net/post/23200651

archived (Wayback Machine)

Our alternative—the only alternative—is to work to slow the filling of our pool.

The Climate Bathtub Model

The following gif demonstrates folding:

😮

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.ca/post/45941426

Source: https://thejenkinscomic.wordpress.com/2025/06/10/wallet/

Lumix G9, Panasonic Leica Vario-Elmarit 12-60mm f/2.8-4

Artist @MrSebSin@sh.itjust.works

(boy's love writers) admit i didn't read the whole article because it seems ridiculous and western reporting on China is like 90% fabrications. someone educate me on whatever this is. is it conservative local governments doing local government shit?

my partner loves this shit especially from China and i don't want to inform her about some made up BS designed to radicalize the slash and yaoi community against the CPC

Cross-posted from "What would be the best way to store the country of a user in SQL?" by @lena@gregtech.eu in !learn_programming@programming.dev

I use Gorm. This is the current code:

package main

import (
	"fmt"
	"log"

	"gorm.io/driver/sqlite"
	"gorm.io/gorm"
)

type Env struct {
	DB     *gorm.DB
	Logger *log.Logger
}

type User struct {
	ID           uint
	Username     string
	Name         string
	Email        string
	PasswordHash string
	Country      string //should probably be a foreign key of another table
}

func initDB() {
	env := &Env{}
	db, err := gorm.Open(sqlite.Open("gorm.db"), &gorm.Config{})
	if err != nil {
		fmt.Printf("Error opening database: %v", err)
		return
	}
	env.DB = db
	env.DB.AutoMigrate(&User{})

}

func main() {
	initDB()
}

As you can see in the comment in the code, I assume the best way would be to have a table of countries and then assign each user to one via a foreign key. However, it seems a bit cumbersome to manually create a list of all countries. Is there a better way to do this?

I ran into this at local Python meetup yesterday. Made with Python and asyncssh. Fun project and also a joke as well as commentary about current state of the social media

Gaza’s Hamas-run police force said Thursday that it killed 12 members of the Israeli-backed Abu Shabab militia in Gaza, which said its fighters had killed five Hamas operatives but made no mention of its own casualties.

According to Hamas, the Abu Shabab gunmen were killed early Wednesday by the Gaza police’s Sahm unit, which Hamas says was established to combat looting. The unit released video footage showing several dead men lying in the street, saying they were Abu Shabab fighters who had been detained and killed for collaborating with Israel. It was not possible to verify the images or the claims around them.

Abu Shabab has been operating in an Israeli-controlled area of southern Gaza’s Rafah. Israel confirmed last week that it was arming the militia to bolster opposition to Hamas.

Israel has threatened to destroy Tehran’s nuclear programme before, ultimately holding back in absence of Washington’s support

Archived version: https://archive.is/newest/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/12/israels-iran-threat-is-familiar-but-it-is-unlikely-to-attack-without-us-backing

Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.

The President of the Republic of Cuba, Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez, held on Wednesday a fraternal meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi, Special Representative of the Chinese Government for Latin America, at the end of his visit to the Caribbean nation, an event that reaffirmed the historic ties between the two socialist countries.

Cuba and China agreed to highlight the special nature of bilateral relations, based on solidarity, mutual respect and a history of 65 years of uninterrupted ties since 1960. On that historical basis, they reaffirmed the political will of the highest leadership of the Party and the Government of the two nations to deepen bilateral ties.

Díaz-Canel thanked China for its firm support in difficult times. He particularly acknowledged the invaluable and sustainable contribution of Chinese projects to the development of priority sectors with high impact for the Cuban population.

Likewise, the Cuban head of state considered that the Community of Shared Future between the two countries endorses the deepening of the consensus built by the different generations of leaders and is the path chosen to move towards greater integration.

Qiu Xiaoqi considered the exchanges with Cuban authorities “fruitful”. He reaffirmed that the Asian giant will continue to support Cuba's economic and social development as part of its policy towards socialist countries.

Likewise, he pointed out that the Chinese side attaches high significance to the development of ties with a socialist nation such as Cuba.

Among the most recent results of the Cuba-China ties, the construction of seven solar parks in six Cuban provinces stands out. These will generate 35 MW and save more than 18,000 tons of fuel per year.

Similarly, more than ten joint projects have been signed in high-tech areas such as artificial intelligence, biotechnology, neuroscience and nanotechnology, based at the Havana Science Park.

Collaboration includes donations of locomotives, buses, energy equipment and the modernization of electrical infrastructure. In addition, joint work is progressing in mining, hydrocarbons and higher education.

cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/66544085

Text to avoid paywall

The Wikimedia Foundation, the nonprofit organization which hosts and develops Wikipedia, has paused an experiment that showed users AI-generated summaries at the top of articles after an overwhelmingly negative reaction from the Wikipedia editors community.

“Just because Google has rolled out its AI summaries doesn't mean we need to one-up them, I sincerely beg you not to test this, on mobile or anywhere else,” one editor said in response to Wikimedia Foundation’s announcement that it will launch a two-week trial of the summaries on the mobile version of Wikipedia. “This would do immediate and irreversible harm to our readers and to our reputation as a decently trustworthy and serious source. Wikipedia has in some ways become a byword for sober boringness, which is excellent. Let's not insult our readers' intelligence and join the stampede to roll out flashy AI summaries. Which is what these are, although here the word ‘machine-generated’ is used instead.”

Two other editors simply commented, “Yuck.”

For years, Wikipedia has been one of the most valuable repositories of information in the world, and a laudable model for community-based, democratic internet platform governance. Its importance has only grown in the last couple of years during the generative AI boom as it’s one of the only internet platforms that has not been significantly degraded by the flood of AI-generated slop and misinformation. As opposed to Google, which since embracing generative AI has instructed its users to eat glue, Wikipedia’s community has kept its articles relatively high quality. As I recently reported last year, editors are actively working to filter out bad, AI-generated content from Wikipedia.

A page detailing the the AI-generated summaries project, called “Simple Article Summaries,” explains that it was proposed after a discussion at Wikimedia’s 2024 conference, Wikimania, where “Wikimedians discussed ways that AI/machine-generated remixing of the already created content can be used to make Wikipedia more accessible and easier to learn from.” Editors who participated in the discussion thought that these summaries could improve the learning experience on Wikipedia, where some article summaries can be quite dense and filled with technical jargon, but that AI features needed to be cleared labeled as such and that users needed an easy to way to flag issues with “machine-generated/remixed content once it was published or generated automatically.”

In one experiment where summaries were enabled for users who have the Wikipedia browser extension installed, the generated summary showed up at the top of the article, which users had to click to expand and read. That summary was also flagged with a yellow “unverified” label.

An example of what the AI-generated summary looked like.

Wikimedia announced that it was going to run the generated summaries experiment on June 2, and was immediately met with dozens of replies from editors who said “very bad idea,” “strongest possible oppose,” Absolutely not,” etc.

“Yes, human editors can introduce reliability and NPOV [neutral point-of-view] issues. But as a collective mass, it evens out into a beautiful corpus,” one editor said. “With Simple Article Summaries, you propose giving one singular editor with known reliability and NPOV issues a platform at the very top of any given article, whilst giving zero editorial control to others. It reinforces the idea that Wikipedia cannot be relied on, destroying a decade of policy work. It reinforces the belief that unsourced, charged content can be added, because this platforms it. I don't think I would feel comfortable contributing to an encyclopedia like this. No other community has mastered collaboration to such a wondrous extent, and this would throw that away.”

A day later, Wikimedia announced that it would pause the launch of the experiment, but indicated that it’s still interested in AI-generated summaries.

“The Wikimedia Foundation has been exploring ways to make Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects more accessible to readers globally,” a Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson told me in an email. “This two-week, opt-in experiment was focused on making complex Wikipedia articles more accessible to people with different reading levels. For the purposes of this experiment, the summaries were generated by an open-weight Aya model by Cohere. It was meant to gauge interest in a feature like this, and to help us think about the right kind of community moderation systems to ensure humans remain central to deciding what information is shown on Wikipedia.”

“It is common to receive a variety of feedback from volunteers, and we incorporate it in our decisions, and sometimes change course,” the Wikimedia Foundation spokesperson added. “We welcome such thoughtful feedback — this is what continues to make Wikipedia a truly collaborative platform of human knowledge.”

“Reading through the comments, it’s clear we could have done a better job introducing this idea and opening up the conversation here on VPT back in March,” a Wikimedia Foundation project manager said. VPT, or “village pump technical,” is where The Wikimedia Foundation and the community discuss technical aspects of the platform. “As internet usage changes over time, we are trying to discover new ways to help new generations learn from Wikipedia to sustain our movement into the future. In consequence, we need to figure out how we can experiment in safe ways that are appropriate for readers and the Wikimedia community. Looking back, we realize the next step with this message should have been to provide more of that context for you all and to make the space for folks to engage further.”

The project manager also said that “Bringing generative AI into the Wikipedia reading experience is a serious set of decisions, with important implications, and we intend to treat it as such, and that “We do not have any plans for bringing a summary feature to the wikis without editor involvement. An editor moderation workflow is required under any circumstances, both for this idea, as well as any future idea around AI summarized or adapted content.”