Congrats for sticking it through!

That happened to me at first as well. What made it feasible was to reconsider how I was approaching the fights

“What was Windows even doing for us?”

Beautiful 🥲

In my ideal world, the population would be sufficiently educated about nutrition in fruit and vegetables that picture-perfect tomatoes that are picked unripe so that they survive long distance hauling would simply never sell.

making sure everyone is okay.

Given the current state of the world, that would be progress.

Comme by !rance@jlai.lu !

Je pense qu’on est moins nombreux mais on s’y amuse quand même.

An important part of that process that needs mentioning is that when the mothers are convinced by Nestle to feed their babies formula instead of their breast milk, their bodies will stop producing the milk before the baby is weaned from it.

So Nestle literally endangers babies’ lives just to sell more baby formula.

Not necessarily cash, but definitely a bit of luck. Some lawyers, if they think a case is guaranteed to go your way, will do the work for free in exchange for receiving a portion of the damages the final judgement will award you. Even rarer, some lawyers care enough about some issues on a personal level that they’ll work for free, or reduced rates, on certain cases.

In this case, I’m not sure there are any damages whatsoever to award to OP - a “win” is forcing the company to abide by the GPL, not pay up money. The EFF and the FSF, as others have brought up, are probably the best bet to find lawyers that would work on this case for the outcome instead of the pay.

Though Islam has certainly become the primary target over the last 20 years.

This cannot be tolerated, even under Eisenhower.

I suddenly want to insert this into my everyday life

I didn’t necessarily think you were being sarcastic, but I appreciate the clarification.

You’re correct, that was a rather shallow comparison for me to make.

I don’t think raw upvotes give the full story either. I’d be interested in seeing, for example, from which instances the voters are distributed.

The problem is that lemmy.ml hosts too many popular communities. There are people who want them gone from their feeds but also don’t want their Lemmy experience to become empty and boring.

The solution is to build up more attractive alternatives of those communities elsewhere, not endlessly campaign the existing users to just drop them. I understand that awareness of why people want alternatives is important for those alternatives to have a chance at attracting users, and being discovered in the first place. I just have yet to actually see these alternatives receive the care they (imo) require to justify switching to them.

The current fedidb stats, to me, state that 488 people is, colloquially speaking, nobody.

Maybe it’s too soon to make such a judgement call, we’ll see over the next few days as people get the chance to see this post.

You’re right, I should have been more specific.

If you’re already storing your password using pass, you aren’t getting 3 factors with pass-otp unless you store the otp generation into a separate store.

For services like GitHub that mandate using an otp, it’s convenient without being an effective loss of 2fa to store everything together.

I already use pass (“the unix password manager”) and there’s a pretty decent extension that lets it handle 2fa: https://github.com/tadfisher/pass-otp

Worth noting that this somewhat defeats the purpose of 2fa if you put your GitHub password in the same store as the one used for otp. Nevertheless, this let’s me sign on to 2fa services from the command line without purchasing a USB dongle or needing a smartphone on-hand.

That’s the proposal to GMO our companion animals like dogs and cats so that they can serve as Geiger-counter + canary-in-the-coal-mine for future humans, right? I don’t remember ever hearing a rendition of it!

You may also interact with countless bots without ever knowing, because creating fake identities is free.

Maybe. Bots don’t seem currently capable of holding a conversation beyond surface level remarks. I think I tend to engage with thought-provoking stuff.

On the off chance that I reply to a bot, it is as much for my reply to be read by other humans viewing the conversation. So I don’t understand how interacting with countless bots is supposed to be such a big downside.

Plus, I don’t see how public/private key pairs prevents endless “fake” identity creation/proliferation. It’s not like you need a government-issued ID to generate them (which, to be clear, still wouldn’t be great -just got other reasons).

Fair, some people value their identity.

To be clear, I’m talking about online identities. In which case, I would argue that if you value it so much you should not delegate it to some third party network. My IRL identity is incredibly valuable to me, which is why I don’t tie it up with any online communications services, especially ones I have no control over.

For average people nothing changes, the app can hold their key for them and even offer email recovery.

…so then the app can post on my behalf without me knowing? And it’ll be signed as if I had done it myself. I don’t understand preferring this if you’re not also self hosting.

That’s something having signatures and a web of trust solves.

But as I wrote in my previous message regarding gpg signing circles (a web of trust), that doesn’t “solve” things. It just introduces more layers and steps to try and compensate for an inherently impossible ideal. Unless I’m misunderstanding your point here?

Besides, you fail to see another problem: Whichever centralized, federated site you use can manipulate anything you read and publish.

I just take that for granted on the internet. It’s true that key-signing messages should make that effectively impossible for all but the largest third parties (FAANG & nation-states). But you still need to verify keys/identities through some out-of-band mechanism, otherwise aren’t you blindly trusting the decentralized network to be providing you with the “true” keys and post, as made by the human author?

Anyway, if you don’t see a need for tools like nostr you don’t need them.

Maybe I’m not expressing myself properly; I don’t see how nostr (and tools like it) effectively address that/those needs.

Sort of like how there was (arguably still is) a need for cash that governments can’t just annul or reverse transactions of, yet bitcoin and all cryptocurrencies I’m aware of fail on that front by effectively allowing state actors (who have state resources) to participate in the mining network and execute 51% attacks.

It weirds me out that most of the arguments for nostr I come across are around how “you can’t loose your identity, it’s just a private/public keypair!”. Maybe I just don’t get banned enough to understand the perspective, but to me the real problem is the content/discussions being lost, not usernames for some corner of the web.

I really don’t care about loosing my identity on a social media website; I’ve found it healthier to view social media accounts on the same level as my customer account at my isp and power utility. When I change ISPs, the old account is closed down and I start up a new one at the other ISP. What’s important to me is the service getting delivered, not that it remembers that I’m the same person from however many years ago. It’s still the same me here in my body, interacting with the web. I know what I need from it, it doesn’t always need to remember who I am (and sometimes I’d rather it forgot or never knew in the first place).

My final point is a bit of a troll, but also kinda serious: how decentralized is it when your identity is “centralized” in your key pair? Loose your keys or loose your password to the key, and your identity is similarly effectively gone. Even worse in this case, no-one can restore it for you. Which is why I don’t tie my identity that much to any online service, especially ones I don’t host. The only thing that truly preserves my identity is the flesh-and-blood body that I inhabit (and even that isn’t fail-proof).

I’ve interacted with GPG signing circles before. So many people are losing access to their keys. So many more are considering some of their keys as compromised. In either case they’re regularly generating wholly new keys, essentially rebooting their “identity” from scratch. When they do so, they always rely on flesh-and-blood interactions to have their new identity verified and trusted by others.

Maybe it’s a question of which circles we’re involved in; mine are already regularly hopping accounts, without being forced to by bans or server outages. I’m used to interpreting the tone & content to recognize “people”, and ignoring usernames. On top of that so many people regularly change their display names on social media for vanity and expression purposes that I can’t reliably use them anyways for recognizing accounts.

I really appreciate Linus trying to tone down the nastiness in his replies over the years, but I’d be willing to let almost anything slide if it means getting a proper, old-school Torvalds tear-down of Musk.

Maybe nowadays, with Elon’s imbecility so publicly visible.

I’ve run Arch for close to 10 years, and was pretty jazzed by Musk in the early days of his presiding over Tesla and Space X. Then again, I was barely an adult at the time, and I hadn’t yet come across the first reports of terrible working conditions and his overall shittyness as a manager/exec.