This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

hedgehog ,

Not really. If your viewpoint wouldn’t catch a Fox News watcher off guard, it’s politically correct. If you want to be politically incorrect you’ll need to change your pronouns to xi/they and brush up on critical race theory.

hedgehog ,

the researchers say the work is a warning about “bad architecture design” within the wider AI ecosystem

Basically they’re saying that if you build a tool that both reads your emails (or other untrusted inputs) and can also act on those emails, without having a manual human approval step and without sanitization of the emails/inputs in the middle, then you’ll be susceptible to this kind of an attack.

hedgehog ,

If you haven’t already ruled it out, I recommend checking out Photoprism. It was the first app I ever self-hosted using Docker and I haven’t needed to change my config because of breaking changes yet.

hedgehog ,

If you need/want a robust multi-user experience, specifically with private personal library support, then Photoprism isn’t going to work, unfortunately.

  • Free:
    • You can create multiple Admin users in the free version, but they all can see and delete everything (unless you don’t give Photoprism delete access)
  • Paid (Essentials or Plus)
    • you can create “User” users who can upload photos - but they still have access to your full library
    • you can create “Viewer” users who can’t see private photos (but they also can’t upload photos).
    • you can share links to albums that are viewable by anyone with the link

I’ve been using it single user and it’s been great, though I should add the caveat that I upload my photos to my server using Photosync and don’t give Photoprism write/delete access to my library, so no uploads come from it. I had been using Photosync for years before even hearing about Photoprism so it just fit very neatly into my existing process.

Multi user features are effectively paywalled and not technically FOSS due to not allowing commercial use, but roles are documented at https://docs.photoprism.app/user-guide/users/roles/ and there’s more info at https://docs.photoprism.app/user-guide/users/libraries/

If Photoprism Plus/Essentials features could work for you, but the ongoing subscription is an issue, then you should know that - unless this has changed - you can sub for one month on Patreon or Github, use the info they provide to upgrade to using the Essentials or Plus features, and then cancel the subscription. I still have an ongoing one but I didn’t connect it to my Patreon account or anything so I don’t think anything would change (except for me no longer getting support, if I needed it) if I canceled it.

hedgehog ,

Yes, but not really. You can have multiple users but not multiple libraries.

hedgehog ,

It didn’t become 2 AM. It was still 2 PM, but on a day that Jenkins already worked.

Jenkins was planning to go to bed on Wednesday the 28th at 10 PM and had his next alarm set for 6 AM on Thursday the 1st. He then adjusted his clock back to Tuesday the 27th at 10 PM.

hedgehog ,

Correct, it was still 2 PM, but Jenkins thought it was 2 PM on a day that he’d already worked.

Jenkins was planning to go to bed on Wednesday the 28th at 10 PM and had his next alarm set for 6 AM on Thursday the 1st. He then adjusted his clock back to Tuesday the 27th at 10 PM, planning to sleep 8 hours plus the entirety of the “extra” Wednesday.

hedgehog ,

“It’s the middle of the night!” is an exclamation people often make when they’re woken up. Normally it actually is night; in this case it wasn’t but Jenkins still said that because he had just been woken up and was confused.

hedgehog ,

but most people either feel like its morally 100% fine to download a copy if they bought one, or don't even know that its technically not legal.

Morally speaking, why would backing up your own copy make a difference, assuming you bought a copy in either case?

hedgehog ,

Laws should be heavily influenced by what is morally right and wrong, but morality as a concept is not influenced by laws. An individual’s or culture’s sense of morality might be, but if laws are derived from morals then that’s fine.

Questions of morality will have different answers when the context changes, so it may be morally unacceptable in one society to do something and morally acceptable to do the same thing in another. Laws have an influence on morality only insofar as laws have an impact on the context in which actions take place. This would not be because the law prohibits those actions.

Some examples:

  • If a law is passed outlawing sharing nonconsensual AI-generated pornography, it should be because it was agreed that doing so is morally wrong. The law being passed doesn’t make it suddenly morally wrong.
  • If a law were passed making some completely innocuous action illegal, and frequently punished - say, hand-painting Nintendo or Disney characters on an interior wall in your own house - then posting publicly on someone’s Facebook wall about loving their Princess Peach X Princess Elsa mural would be morally wrong, even though it would have been fine to do that before the law was passed.

The context that we have is that it is illegal (in the US) to:

  • distribute copyrighted materials
  • download copyrighted materials
  • bypass DRM even when making a backup, except for specific purposes. With video games, unless you are circumventing DRM because the auth servers were taken down (inapplicable for the Switch) or solely because you have a physical disability and are patching the game to support other input options (standard keyboard and mouse specifically excluded), then it is still illegal.

So in either case you’d be doing something illegal. But morally, in a situation where you’ve purchased the game and are platform-shifting to an unsupported platform (like the “time-shifting” defense used with VHS recordings, DVRs, etc.), then the laws aren’t really relevant. The laws certainly don’t exist because there’s societal agreement that this type of platform shifting is morally wrong.

The reason the person I replied to had to pay someone to rip his own game for him is because Nintendo makes it difficult to do so. Even if the law were different and allowed those actions, I don’t understand why anyone would think that it makes sense that a corporation can morally obligate their customers (who want to consume their product in a particular way) to perform work with no value add when the customers could get what they want by doing something much easier.

Unless you’re actually causing harm (directly or indirectly) to someone by your actions in one instance but not the other, I don’t see how one option would be morally acceptable and the other morally wrong.

If the game were supported on the other platform, then the context - and potentially the outcome - changes. If Nintendo invested a decent amount of money porting BotW to Android phones and it cost them a decent amount of money to do so, then would it be morally wrong to not support them and to emulate it instead? Would there be an ethical obligation to support them? What if the Android port was terrible - would it be acceptable to buy it, then use the emulated version anyway - and if you’d bought the Android version and were emulating it on Android, would there still be a moral or ethical obligation to purchase the same cart you were emulating? What if Nintendo just licensed or repackaged Yuzu and didn’t actually make any changes to the game, so their investment was minimal?

It’s a different situation entirely when determining whether it’s morally wrong to host a site with freely downloadable ROMs. The site could be used by people who did not purchase those games, causing lost revenue to their creators.

Both of those situations have grey areas and I can see why someone would consider them immoral. I have opinions on them, of course, but there’s a lot more nuance there; I can easily see why someone would feel differently.

With this specific situation I don’t understand - and am trying to understand - how someone could come to different conclusions for the morality of the two actions. Are they inferring that you support the site hosting the content when you download it? (If you use an adblocker and don’t financially support them, would it then be fine?) Are they assuming torrenting, where you would have to either leech (which they would consider immoral) or seed, and thus distribute, as well? Or is there some other factor that I’m not thinking of?

hedgehog ,

Are you telling me that Digital IDs don’t operate with a private/public key model; with the private key stored and inaccessible in a chip leveraging WebAuthn (or WebAuthn-like) privacy-respecting tech from a trusted vendor like Yubico; with unique IDs generated per vendor the user signs up with; all within the ID cards/driver licenses that are freely issued by the government; with the ability for a user to mark another WebAuthn device (like a Yubikey) as trusted/untrusted through a government portal that undergoes regular security audits? Because if they did, the scenarios you outlined wouldn’t be feasible without someone’s device (and PIN) being physically taken or the vendor’s site being compromised.

The government would still be able to determine what you viewed if they had access to the sites’ internal data and the vendors stored your info, but that would still require a warrant.

And if they don’t use that or a similar approach, the approach they’re using for their “Digital IDs” is probably garbage.

hedgehog ,

This is a fairly big departure from what you proposed here but your comment made me think about it:

If you had one time / every 5 year payments, you could charge a fairly sizable amount and then use a portion of that money to hire people to vet, interview, and take professional photographs of every user for their profiles (which they could of course combine with their own pictures, though those would be unverified). I’m thinking like $500+, to be clear - but for that you get:

  • great pictures taken of you
  • more confidence that anyone you see or match with is actually the person they say they are
  • ability to have your interview used for determining compatibility, such that anyone you’re introduced to on the app is much more likely to be into you and someone you’re into

Remember when Spez said it was "It's time we grow up and behave like an adult company"? Apparently, that means paying himself $193 million and single-handedly tanking Reddit's profitability right b... ( www.npr.org )

Remember when Spez said it was "It's time we grow up and behave like an adult company"? Apparently, that means paying himself $193 million and single-handedly tanking Reddit's profitability right b...::undefined

hedgehog ,

Its a huge headache for startups sometimes. I had team members I wanted to compensate but just giving them the equity would have been an imediate big tax bill on a non-liquid, and speculative, asset. There's ways to massage it (like vesting) but he will absolutely have that taxed.

Is there an equivalent of the sell-to-cover withholding strategy for stocks that aren’t publicly tradable?

hedgehog ,

Signal blog post on the topic, with instructions and links to join the beta: https://signal.org/blog/phone-number-privacy-usernames/

‘Kids Online Safety Act’ is a Trojan Horse For Digital Censorship. ( consumerchoicecenter.org )

‘Kids Online Safety Act’ is a Trojan Horse For Digital Censorship.::Washington, D.C. - This week, a bipartisan cohort of US Senators unveiled a new version of the Kids Online Safety Act, a bill that aims to impose various restrictions and requirements on tech

hedgehog ,

The bill is garbage, but it cracks me up that they think this part is a bad thing:

The bill seeks to … limit developers’ inclusion of personalized recommendation systems, notifications, appearance-altering filters, and in-game purchases for apps used by minors.

Every item on that list has been abused by web/app developers in ways that exploit and/or negatively affect the brains of developing children.

hedgehog ,

Not at all. We just need to provide tools to enable parents to effectively manage their children’s experiences. One component of that would be requiring web and app developers to adhere to a higher set of standards if their website or app is available to children.

Since parents are the ones making devices available to their children, they would be empowered to do one of the following:

  • set up the device as a child account that’s linked to an adult account elsewhere
  • set up two accounts on the device - one for themselves and one for the child

Then the parents would be able to manage apps installed on the device / sites that are navigable. This could include both apps/sites that are explicitly targeted at children and those that have a child-targeted experience, which, if accessed from a child’s account would be opted into automatically. Those apps and sites would be held to the higher standards and would be prohibited from employing predatory patterns, etc..

A parent should be able to feel safe allowing their child to install any app or access any site they want that adheres to these standards.

It would even be feasible to have apps identify the standards they adhere to, such that a parent could opt to only search for / only allow installation of apps / experiences that meet specific criteria. For example, Lexi’s parents might be fine with cartoony face filters but not with in-app purchases, Simon’s parents might not be okay with either, and Sam’s parents might be cool with her installing literally anything that isn’t pornographic.

If a device/account isn’t set up as a child’s device then none of those restrictions would be relevant. This would mean that if a mother handed her son her unlocked iPad to watch a video on Youtube and then left the room, she might come back to him watching something else. An “easy” way to fix that is to require devices to support a “child” user / experience, which could be managed similarly to what I described above (or at least by allow-listing specific apps that are permitted) even if set up as an adult device, rather than only supporting single user experiences.

hedgehog ,

The bill is garbage,

Who wrote the sentence I just quoted?

Do you often hear the ringing of switching power supplies and devices when you are in a quiet space?

I'm curious, how many people are aware of these sounds. I have designed, etched, and built my own switching power supplies along with winding my own transformers. I am aware of the source of the noise. So, does anyone else hear these high frequency sounds regularly?

hedgehog ,

A good night’s sleep, exercise, and a good diet make a huge difference to my ability to focus. It’s a shame that having ADHD means that I’m terrible at getting myself to exercise, eat well, and to sleep at a normal time, even when medicated. (Note that I haven’t watched those specific videos)

There’s a pretty great channel for ADHD on Youtube - the creator of all the videos above - https://m.youtube.com/@HowtoADHD - and I think she’s covered that topic.

hedgehog ,

Have you considered not using the Home Assistant OS? You don’t need to run it to use Home Assistant. You can instead set your host up with some other OS, like Debian, and then run Home Assistant in a docker container (or containers, plural) and run any other containers you want.

I’m not doing this myself so can’t speak to its limitations, but from what I’ve heard, if you’re familiar with Docker then it’s pretty straightforward.

A lot of apps use hard coded paths, so using a subdomain per app makes it much easier to use them all. Traefik has middleware, including stripPrefix, which allow you to strip a path prefix before forwarding the path to the app, though - have you tried that approach?

hedgehog ,

Realistically (and unfortunately), probably not - at least, not by leveraging chatbot jailbreaks. From a legal perspective, if you have the expertise to execute a jailbreak - which would be made clear in the transcripts that would be shared with the court - you also have the understanding of its unreliability that this plaintiff lacked.

The other issue is the way he was promised the discount - buy the tickets now, file a claim for the discount later. You could potentially demand an upfront discount be honored under false advertising laws, but even then it would need to be a “realistic” discount, as obvious clerical errors are generally (depending on jurisdiction) exempt. No buying a brand new truck for $1, unfortunately.

If I’m wrong about either of the above, I won’t complain. If you have an agent promising trucks to customers for $1 and you don’t immediately fire that agent, you’re effectively endorsing their promise, right?

On the other hand, we’ll likely get enough cases like this - where the AI misleads the customer into thinking they can get a post-purchase discount without any suspicious chat prompts from the customer - that many corporations will start to take a less aggressive approach with AI. And until they do, hopefully those cases all work out like this one.

hedgehog ,

In addition to not being cheap, it’s also not disposable. Pilot manufactures and sells refill cartridges - you can get them in office supply stores, on Amazon, at Walmart, and at dedicated pen retailers. And it took me all of two seconds to discover that with a simple web search.

hedgehog ,

For anyone else caught in captcha hell or who would prefer the original / a different mirror, here is the original link: https://www.pcgamesn.com/baldurs-gate-3/patch-6-notes

hedgehog ,

That’s some wild speculation there.

What you described would be a contrived and inefficient workaround that would have little to no impact on its legality compared to just using the underlying texts as part of a training corpus.

Not sure why you think Spotify wouldn’t want to eliminate the cost of voice actors and production. If you’re self-publishing, recording and producing an audiobook traditionally is a substantial expense. If Spotify can offer something like Google’s Auto-Narrated Audiobooks to authors, then that would enable them to bring those authors to Spotify (potentially exclusively).

Spotify’s goal also is not necessarily to imitate the voices from the existing audiobooks. There is a lot that goes into making an audiobook successful, and just copying the voice alone wouldn’t convey that. For example, pairing tone and cadence changes with what’s being narrated, techniques for conveying dialogue, particularly between different characters, etc.. How you speak is just as important as your raw voice.

That would allow Spotify to create audiobooks using those techniques without using the voice of anyone who hadn’t signed away rights to it. However I would argue that some of the techniques they would likely use are integral to a person’s voice.

It’s also feasible that Spotify wants to be able to take an existing audiobook and make it available with a different voice. This wouldn’t require the audiobook to have ever been trained on - they would just replace the existing voice in it with another while preserving the pauses, tone shifts, etc. (and possibly adjusting them to be appropriate for the new voice).

More closely aligned to the specific derivative work they mentioned would be to implement something like Kindle/Audible’s Whispersync, potentially in collaboration with a non-Amazon ebook retailer like Barnes&Noble or Kobo.

hedgehog ,

For the former use case, have you considered a dedicated solution? For example: https://libimobiledevice.org/

hedgehog ,

Carbon credits are fake.

Carbon credits should instead be a tax - one that every major corporation has to pay based off their carbon emissions, and the funds should be used exclusively to fund renewable energy sources, renewable goods manufacturing, and to repair the damage done by traditional fuels.

hedgehog ,

If a law requires then intent then of course intent is relevant.

hedgehog ,

“I had a drone and I accidentally the whole thing. Is that bad? Should I call someone to help?”

Super Bowl Is Better Protected Than Our Troops ( www.kenklippenstein.com )

This year’s Super Bowl in Las Vegas has better protections against rogue drones than the many small U.S. bases in the Middle East like Tower 22, where three American soldiers were killed by a kamikaze drone last month due to minimal anti-drone defenses, as I reported at The Intercept....

hedgehog ,

This article is full of misinformation and reads like the rantings of an angry and incompetent MAGA propagandist.

Does it make sense to have robust protections for an event that will have 65,000 civilians present - and where the equipment and personnel involved can be deployed to other high profile events afterward, even if there isn’t a specific drone threat? Yes.

This year’s Super Bowl in Las Vegas has better protections against rogue drones than the many small U.S. bases in the Middle East like Tower 22

“Many small US bases,” huh? And the author thinks that each of them should be better protected than the Super Bowl? That doesn’t make a ton of sense to me. Is this in a heavy casualty zone or something? No - we’ve had 3 casualties, total, across all bases, since this engagement started.

Don’t get me wrong - I think our soldiers should be kept safe. Leave it to me and I’d have every single one of those soldiers back on US soil. That would keep them safe but probably wouldn’t make the author happy.

Unlike Tower 22, this year’s Super Bowl will enjoy a host of “hardened” measures including electromagnetic weapons that can incapacitate drones.

The bases have anti-drone tech, but they also have drones and one was returning at the same time as the attack, which likely is why a large part of why the attack was successful. Does the author think that the super bowl defenses would have foiled such an attack? He implies as much but gives no evidence in support of that claim.

In fact, the entire region is a no-drone zone. So sure, we can deploy the super bowl defenses to those bases - they just have to understand that their drones will be shot down, too.

To be honest, from my uneducated point of view, the defenses described for the bases sound more sophisticated than the ones in place at the Super Bowl, not less.

That all said, the author’s other article has this tidbit:

Just a week before the attack, the military announced an $84 million contract to work on a replacement to the TPS-75, a mobile, ground-based radar array from the 1960s.

So the military is literally in the process of improving their defenses and they just haven’t been built yet? Strange, in this article the author said there hadn’t been any efforts to improve them.

Compare this hypervigilance with the glib way the Biden administration has discussed the terrorist drone that slipped past military defenses and killed three Americans and injured 41 others.

Glib how? This is what I found for their response:

The president, in the written statement, called it a “despicable and wholly unjust attack” and said the service members were “risking their own safety for the safety of their fellow Americans, and our allies and partners with whom we stand in the fight against terrorism. It is a fight we will not cease.”

Doesn’t sound glib to me.

For the most part. You know, besides the deaths of three National Guard soldiers from Georgia. Working class people with families — the supposed focus of the Biden administration’s “foreign policy for the working class.” But who cares about them?

I imagine at least the victims of the 85 retaliatory attacks the US made cared.

It’s unclear what the author wants, other than to wave a “Let’s Go Brandon” flag around while getting drunk and posting misinformation.

hedgehog ,

The comment they replied to comprised 6 sentences. 5 of those sentences were untrue or incorrect. The other sentence (the 5th one, starting with “It’s an absurd concept”) is technically true but has a different meaning when read with the understanding that the other sentences are false.

Other replies dive into why it’s untrue.

hedgehog ,

Ok, well it was intended to be an opinion, so your assertion that I'm incorrect is incorrect because its my opinion, but that aside, which part?

My understanding is that your opinion is “This is bullshit because X” (where “X” refers to this law applying to Lemmy and thus having the implications you outlined) but your comment was almost entirely about it applying to Lemmy and the implications. If your opinion were “It would be bullshit if it applied to Lemmy,” I would agree with you, but point out that it does not.

This essentially adds up to government proctorship of any "public forum" on the internet, including here...

This is incorrect because the law does not apply to Lemmy. See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Services_Act and the associated sources for more details on why. If you believe that Lemmy has more than 45 million users in the EU please share where you’re getting those figures.

So if I randomly throw an "all lives matter" right here mid-comment, which while at face value is a ridiculously benign thing to say, can be and almost always is considered to be hate speech, lemmy is entirely obligated to immediately remove my comment or face heavy sanctions from the EU.

This hypothetical scenario is irrelevant and the conclusion about Lemmy’s obligations are incorrect because the law does not apply to Lemmy.

It's an extreme caricature of an example that I assume won't go anywhere, but the point is that it could, and the deciding factor on that isn't anyone here, the deciding factor is a bunch of rando EU officials...

“The point is that it could” is incorrect because you have misinterpreted the law as applying to Lemmy when it does not.

If some Karen in Wales in the right position decides she doesn't like my comment, she could initiate a "hefty" fine against lemmy admins.

See above. Karen could do no such thing, even if she was in the EU.

It's an absurd concept, and I don't say that in the context of tuker Carlson (who I simply don't give two shits about in any context), I say that in the context of us, as a "social media" community.

This is the 5th sentence.

We are subject to this proctorship, this censorship...

This is incorrect because as Lemmy users, we are not subject to it, as the law does not apply to Lemmy.

Technically this would be true if you made this statement about those of us who are users of social media platforms to which the laws do apply, but that would be incongruent with your previous statements (and would assume that we are all users of those platforms - and many Lemmy users are not), so I find it fair to not allow for that possibility.

hedgehog ,

Stating that it applies to Lemmy today is categorically untrue. If you think that explaining why you were wrong is the same as sticking my head in the sand, then that’s evidence that you’re failing at basic logic and reasoning, because that progression is unsound. Are you just mad and not thinking straight or is this indicative of your normal capacity? If the latter, would you like help improving at that or are you committed to carrying on as is?

Your second paragraph is an example of the slippery slope fallacy and your last is simple fearmongering. Do you have any reason to believe those statements or are they, too, just your “opinions?”

I get the impression that you might be under the understanding that you can say anything and call it an opinion. That isn’t actually how opinions work, and in fact, “I’m entitled to my opinion” is a logical fallacy when applied to statements of fact. It’s an especially dangerous one as it’s a thought stopper that enables cognitive dissonance, which is how you end up in a cult. (If you’ve read 1984, “doublethink” is an extreme example of cognitive dissonance.) I suggest you disabuse yourself of the fallacy.

hedgehog ,

Are you drunk?

hedgehog ,

No, were just apparently on very different wavelengths here

Agreed. I promise that I'm trying my best to understand your perspective, too.

we’re on friendly terms here from my perspective

No disagreement here.

Do you not think that government determination of what is or is not acceptable on “social media” (quotes because generalizing) is eerily similar to thoughtcrime? And an orwellian policy? Making a 1984 reference in its defense a little ironic?

No, not at all.

First of all, the alternative is that you give the power to determine what's acceptable entirely to corporations. Almost all corporations already prohibited the sort of speech that would be impacted by these laws.

Second of all, thoughtcrime is fundamentally a different animal than what the EU is doing. Thoughtcrime is the policing of thoughts that are contrary to what the government wants you to think, regardless of whether those thoughts are actually harmful, and it's implemented via pervasive surveillance and a lack of privacy. Criticizing the government is, of course, prohibited.

By contrast, the EU is mandating the censorship of hate speech and calls for violence. The sentiments and logic associated with that hate speech are used as justification for violence and to restrict liberties. And this type of speech is not legally protected in the US under the 1st Amendment.

In 1984, the government rewrites history and uses a multitude of techniques that trick you into accepting things that are not true as being true. This is why it's important to be able to recognize logical fallacies - they're used by all sorts of propaganda techniques with the goal of getting people to act against their own best interests, e.g., by getting poor people to vote for Republicans or to support laws that infringe on our liberties by justifying them by saying "It's for the children!" The world would be a better place if misinformation and misleading propaganda at scale (meaning, in advertisement, on news shows, etc.) were illegal.

I don't have to engage in doublethink to accept the justification for the EU's law, but the arguments that you've shared for why I should oppose it would require that of me. Ultimately, what I'm asking you is: why would I be opposed to a law that itself is 100% fine, just because the same legislators might later pass a different law that I don't like? This law doesn't make it any easier for them to pass one like what you described.

hedgehog ,

Ultimately because the basic premise of the law could (in general) be the basis for the government to remove our entire conversation here...

It is potentially a tool to do this

In 1984, the government rewrites history and uses a multitude of techniques that trick you into accepting things that are not true as being true.

The laws are completely unlike another, so the progression you’ve described isn’t a concern. One law regulates mega corporations who already have relationships with EU countries; the one you’ve described would regulate ordinary people.

Corporations aren’t people, no matter what they would have you believe. They don’t need to be defended in the same way.

And of course any of those people outside the EU could just ignore them. So even if I thought it were likely that the EU would do this, I wouldn’t care. If the EU sanctioned a Lemmy instance, it wouldn’t ultimately matter; Lemmy instance owners would need to ensure that their hosting setup was outside the EU but that’s it.

I don't object for the sake of my my benefit, I object for the sake of yours (everyone).

I see it a one degree increment on the proverbial frog in the proverbial pot, being slowly but surely brought to boil and it's death, and I don't really care who it affects in the moment.

I’m concerned about people’s freedom being effectively taken away by corporations - e.g., pushing up the price of housing by “investing” in the housing market and making it unaffordable for lower income people; lobbying for regulations that make it unaffordable for small businesses to enter spaces that large businesses already exist in; lobbying for regulations that make it difficult to exert our power against them; heck, just being treated as people and being able to donate to political campaigns in the first place; exploiting workers; exploiting resources; and so on.

I’m concerned about the ways that the US government takes away our individual and collective freedoms - e.g., gerrymandering; refusal to implement a proper system for elections that doesn’t result in people thinking their votes are being wasted if they vote for third parties; the rights of women that have been revoked with Roe v. Wade being overturned and the laws passed since; our public school budgets being siphoned to subsidize private schools for the rich; slashing public aid programs such that we become even more beholden to corporations; and so on.

There is a frog being boiled, but it’s us, and the stove is much closer to home.

hedgehog ,

You don’t develop webapps in HTML5, though? You use a combination of HTML, CSS, and JavaScript (or any of a number of other technologies that reduce to the same thing, or to WebAssembly, etc), to build apps. Of those three, JavaScript does the heavy lifting and its development hasn’t stagnated. Even the spec is still undergoing heavy development - https://github.com/tc39/ecma402 - with annual releases every year in June since 2015.

That said, Apple’s PWAs have historically been behind the curve and Safari frequently lacks features that other browsers have. I’m still glad Safari exists and has a significant market share thanks to iPhones, because Firefox’s < 5% market share isn’t enough to keep us from a completely Chrome-dominated internet. I want Apple to do better but I also don’t want Google to be more free to do worse. And this isn’t an example of Apple doing “worse” unless it actually gets released to a non-Beta branch.

hedgehog ,

Am I out of touch? No! Everyone is a fucking transphobe!

Is this supposed to be an ironic comment? I genuinely can’t tell if you’re saying this seriously, tongue-in-cheek, or if you’re mocking the people who have been the most vocal in their criticism of anyone touching the Harry Potter IP.

hedgehog ,

From the article:

Raichik accused Ingram and NBC News of being responsible for a threat she received following the article’s publication

The hypocrisy is palpable.

I'm looking for a TOS-breaking telegram client that strips out all the premium shit

Hello fellow pirates! I'm tired of having all the telegram premium ads and antifeatures in the client and I'm looking for a client that removed them even if it's against the TOS. Any tips? I'd rather use an actual open source fork than a cracked version of the original...

hedgehog ,

it now primarily has alt-right, conspiracy and terrorist uses.

Assuming you meant “users” - I highly doubt that the users you described are even a large minority of Telegram’s user base. They’re highly publicized but that’s it.

Telegram is just a tool. How is saying “don’t use it because terrorists use it” different from saying “don’t use a screwdriver because terrorists use screwdrivers.”

Telegram isn’t a secure messenger like Signal, Matrix, the others you mentioned, or other e2ee options out there. It has an extremely limited secure mode that is useful if you need to have a one-off conversation, but that’s it. But if you don’t need a secure messenger and instead want something to replace Twitter, Discord, other social media, or to serve some other purpose, then it’s fine for that.

founder is sketchy

I’m not familiar with the folks associated with the other apps you mentioned, but Signal’s former CEO and co-founder, Moxie, is a pretty dubious character, too. Signal is anti-FOSS: you can’t use their servers if you fork the client; they won’t federate if you host your own servers; they’re opposed to being on F-Droid or even providing reproducible builds; and they have a history of failing to update their repos in a timely manner, to the point that clients built from source couldn’t even connect to their servers.

That all said, I still use and recommend Signal.

hedgehog ,

To summarize, since the article headline is a bit misleading and the autotldr comment was garbage:

At least 33 times, shortly after the "Libs of Tiktok" X account posted about an accusation about a particular school, hospital, government office, small business, etc., that place received a threat of some kind. 21 of those threats were bomb threats.

Detectives, police officers, and government officials find the timing of the threats suspicious and believe they might have been issued by supporters of the account. When NBC News asked about this, Raichik, who runs the Libs of Tiktok account, declined to respond, but referenced the communication on X with a yawning emoji, dismissing such claims, stating that the threats were by people seeking to paint her as an extremist and discredit her.

Three of the threats have resulted in prosecutors pursuing charges.

The article also gives some other info on Raichik and the account:

  • EM unbanned the account and he regularly engages with and boosts the account’s posts
  • “Raichik was appointed to the Oklahoma Department of Education’s Library Media Advisory Committee by Superintendent Ryan Walters” earlier this year
  • Konstantine Anthony received violent threats by email within an hour of Libs of Tiktok featuring him
hedgehog ,

My main experience casting to Apple TVs from Linux is with Home Assistant, which has a few different addons related to Apple TV. Unfortunately most are related to receiving casts or casting music, and it doesn’t look like any support screen mirroring. The main library - https://pyatv.dev - has only limited support for AirPlay, and its documentation indicates it lacks screen mirroring support. If you just want to stream a video, though, then it would be worth looking into.

open-airplay with the auth solution by @funtax (on Github) is the approach I would try, but unfortunately I can’t comment as to whether or not that actually still works.

hedgehog ,

I don’t think they contributed to openairplay, but they mentioned in an open issue in the openairplay repo that they had created a separate repo to handle the auth piece. Strangely I can’t find the issue now, but this is the repo I was talking about for that: https://github.com/openairplay/AirPlayAuth

That all said, it pyatv will work for you it looks like a much better bet, anyway. Good luck!

hedgehog ,

customers will pay $0.005 per public IPv4 address per hour

That works out to $43.80 per year ($43.92 if it’s a leap year).

today's average IPv4 price tag [is] $35

Seems like AWS’s IPv4 pricing is a bit of a rip-off. Not that there’s much of an alternative for anyone who isn’t able to buy an entire block, though.

Tried to cancel my gym membership and of course I'm not allowed to do that online

i tried to update my credit card so they won't send me daily fucking emails that i "owe" them $30 (because a gym membership definitely needs to be a cOnTraCt, sure, sure), but the website didn't work, so I tried calling their "automated" system, whereupon after entering my info to the robot, it gave up and connected me to a guy...

hedgehog ,

I had a gym tell me I could only cancel by mail, so I sent them a certified letter. They kept billing me and eventually the letter got returned because they never signed for it. So I just disputed the charges from every date since I’d first sent the letter. After I shared the scan of the returned envelope with my bank the first time they made every subsequent chargeback real easy. I think they billed me two more times after that before they finally stopped - unsure if it was because they were blacklisted or because of the fees they got charged.

hedgehog ,

In the US, if you don’t proceed to step 3, step 2 is legal (so long as the CD lacks DRM). You’re permitted a single backup under fair use; you’re also permitted to rip the music for personal use, like loading it onto a music player. You’re not supposed to burn it to a regular CD-R (is it illegal? Idk), but burning it to an Audio CD-R (where there is a tax that is distributed to rights holders like royalties) is endorsed by the RIAA.

hedgehog ,

For trivial calculations that’s still going to be accessible just by looking up a formula. For more complicated ones… I can’t remember the last time I needed something like that. What sorts of use cases are you thinking of?

hedgehog ,

Thanks for providing the least nuanced take I’ve heard today

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • updates
  • programming
  • tech
  • testing
  • marketreserach
  • drbboard
  • til
  • wanderlust
  • bitcoincash
  • Sacramento
  • All magazines