[-] [email protected] 41 points 2 months ago

I think that's obtuse, comedy has no limits: As long as you don't act upon uncomfortable / morally reprehensible ideas you joke about, you aren't any worse or better than if you had never joked about it. I would argue that exposing a bunch of people for what they joke about with no evidence that they've actually done something wrong is far worse than joking about offensive subjects. (one has zero negative affects, the other has many)

(I must say I disagree completely with that guy sharing messages from his girlfriend- that piece is very weird and a total breach of trust)

[-] [email protected] 37 points 1 year ago

The way I see it, community-based social media is a public forum, where every post / comment is public (Obviously less applicable on an individualized platform like Instagram). Everyone has an inherent right to privacy, but not when they're using a platform like Lemmy. Twitter and Facebook are fundamentally different platforms. You can't expect privacy while using lemmy, so use a different platform to post private content.

[-] [email protected] 38 points 2 years ago

LMAO what a horrible take, not even one of those countries originated in a similar way to Israel 💀

[-] [email protected] 43 points 2 years ago

In pretty much every situation I've ever been told thank you, I've felt that "No Problem" is a much better representation of how I feel than "You're Welcome".

[-] [email protected] 36 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Metadata is all the content of a message besides the actual text content of the message (i.e. what you type). Examples would be the date and time it is sent, what users these messages were sent to / from, and the IP addresses of both parties. (The availability of metadata varies from messenger to messenger).

I like this example: If you only text your Aunt Sally, who lives in Alaska, twice per year to wish her a happy birthday and Christmas, just by looking at the metadata someone could infer the meaning of your messages, as well as your relationship to the person you're messaging. To a point this is true about any messages you sent.

As for Whatsapp specifically, it being end-to-end doesn't really matter imo, as the application is not open source and is owned by an advertising / social media company. As long as the code is closed source, you cannot be sure:

  1. That your messages are encrypted at all
  2. That your encryption keys are kept on-device, and not plainly available to a centralized party
  3. That the encryption the application is using is securely implemented

At least for applications handling truly sensitive information (for the average person only their messenger and browser), you should be using open source software. The easiest recommendations I can make are:

  1. Browsers: Firefox, Thorium, Brave (disabled all cryptocrap)
  2. Messengers: Signal, SimpleX Chat, XMPP

Anyways, I hope this was a satisfactory answer.

[-] [email protected] 34 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

It amazes me how little some police officers know about the law and the limits of their authority. Its literally the one thing a cop should be informed about.

[-] [email protected] 34 points 2 years ago

Im sure ending wokeness ought'a do something about it.

[-] [email protected] 39 points 2 years ago

A University named after a disgusting, abhorrently racist and radical man makes derogatory decision.

[-] [email protected] 39 points 2 years ago

Were doomed if PragerU gets screentime in classrooms.

[-] [email protected] 38 points 2 years ago

I wouldn't be very happy if my browser injected ads into webpages.

[-] [email protected] 37 points 2 years ago

Totally agree. Facebook should have been absolutely crippled financially after influencing an election, but they get off scot free.

My idea is this:

Instead of a maximum fine being applied, you take a violation, lets say influencing an election, and you calculate how much of the corporations revenue came from that source. (i.e. Facebook messenger revenue would not count for election manipulation). Then, take a huge portion of that revenue (60%, 70%? [Depending on the violation]) and take that from their revenue. Who gives a shit if Facebook literally has to close down one of their services from lack of finances, thats what they get.

[-] [email protected] 35 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The most ridiculous part are services insisting you install an app when everything their app does could be in a progressive web app. PWAs are less work to develop as they can run on any device with a browser. For fast food and clothing brands especially, I think PWAs are a no brainer. (Unless you want to track your customers coughTimHortonscough)

view more: ‹ prev next ›

amanneedsamaid

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 2 years ago