oxjox

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 hours ago

No. It’s because it’s you. Blocked.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 hours ago

OP is really shilling for Bluesky.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Remember your words when Netanyahu bombs Gaza and people want to ask the community about it.

Just because YOU don't want to hear about something doesn't mean en entire community should BAN discussion of it. It's absolutely bonkers that anyone can rationalize this position.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

If some other country had a historic election, I would HOPE to see open dialog spread in places like this for people to express themselves. Why ban an internationally relevant discussion when people have the choice to be members of the community. How about - if you don't like it, you can leave.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 week ago

I see you've chosen to ignore the point about the influence this has on hundreds of millions of people.

[–] [email protected] 81 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (57 children)

How the fuck is Lemmy supposed to serve as an open alternative to corporate controlled social media when the mods ban discussing one of the most impactful events of the day? You should be begging people to talk about politics here. Unsubbed. EDIT: AND BLOCKED. If I wanted to hang out in a fascist community I'd join twitter.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 week ago (2 children)

You are so fucking wrong. I have never understood this logic that because people are doing things out in the open that it's a good thing. They are popularizing their ideas. More people are exposed to them when they're out in the open. Had they been operating in some obscure forum, they would lack the advertising of their ideas to others.

For what possible reason could this be "positive"? So that the rest of us are aware of their first amendment protected hateful ideas? What good does that do anyone? We just elected one of them to be president of the United States. Allowing hate speech to bloom out in the open tempers our reactions and slowly seeps into our minds as propaganda.

Freedom of speech is, in the US, something that the US Constitution promises will not be restricted by Congress. It is not something any private company is required to protect. I would argue that private companies have a responsibility to its users to ban all hate speech and report substantiated threats to law enforcement.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I just got banned from a sub for trying to explain this exact thing. Their response was "not that's not how voting works - if I vote for a person, they get my vote. If I don't vote for someone, they don't get my vote." and "Harris is literally saying the same thing." I sent a thank you to the mod for banning me because my brain was breaking.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago

Reading more than a headline.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

People also just drive a lot more today than 40 years ago, in part, because jobs and shopping are further away (it's gone down since COVID due to more WFH). A car with 100K miles on it was an old car. Now it's not unheard of for people to put that kind of mileage on their car in under five years. I have no argument that vehicles are much more well built today.

As I said in another comment, I'm not arguing that cars are more capable of being on the road, just that I don't believe people are going to choose to drive a ten to twenty year old car in 2035 - 2045 as much as they had fifty years prior. You could put less than $1,000 into a 100k mile car in the 90s and expect to get another 50k+ out of it. At least, I can confirm that that's what I did with my 1976 Ford Elite and later my 1980 Camaro.

Moreover, there's nothing aside from the maintenance of the vehicle and maybe improved gas mileage that would deter anyone from choosing to drive an older vehicle. There are far more reasons today to not choose a ten year old car than there were 30-40 years ago.

My point is about consumer choice and the advancements of technology. Will people choose to drive vehicles that aren't compatible with future technology.

 

I've been trying to delete as many online accounts as possible to reduce the threat of my personal information / duplicate passwords / my cell number getting out there. I know, it's probably not worth the effort but it does at least clean up my password manager and MFA app.

I've tried had trouble getting my personal information scrubbed and my account deleted at Robinhood and LendingTree. Both have policies that claim they're unable to delete user accounts due to federal regulations.

Here's the bit from Lending Tree: https://www.lendingclub.com/legal/privacy-policy

Data Retention: Due to the regulated nature of our industry, we are under legal requirements to retain data and are generally not able to delete consumer transactional data, credit or deposit account application data, or other financial information upon request. Certain regulations issued by state and/or federal government agencies may require us to maintain and report demographic information on the collective activities of our membership. We may also be required to maintain information about you for at least seven years to comply with applicable federal and state laws regarding recordkeeping, reporting, and audits. Criteria used to determine the period of time information about you is retained are primarily related to legal requirements and usefulness of the information for the purposes it was collected.

In both of these cases, I haven't used the account in many years (RH: 2020, LT: 2018). It serves no purpose to maintain this account other than to exist as data for some malicious actor to acquire and act upon.

With data leaks happening practically every day, I'm really not comfortable with financial agencies with varying degrees of security keeping my information forever. I would think it would be in their own best interest to comply with a deletion request to prevent anyone from scamming them.

Also, I can't tell you how many websites I've lost access to because my phone number was tied to log in. I previously had a company-issued cell phone and not longer have access to that. Any website that requires a phone number for MFA is just horrible. I'm trying to sign into another financial site now and apparently I'm not able to do so without a phone number I had eight years ago.

Wondering if anyone is familiar with this federal regulation that requires they hold on to this information and if there's some sort of way around this either with a lawyer or federal form or something.

 

It's a bit shocking to me when I see people online putting 9/11 conspiracies in the same box as "MAGA" conspiracies (for lack of a better term, sorry).

For reference, I was 24 in 2001 living in central NJ. Even without social media or fake news websites or what cable news has become today, I have vivid memories of people having the firm belief that there was something up with the attack on 9/11. Was this just my social circle?

Jet fuel melting steel beams was one of the more fringe and unfounded (and quickly debunked) ideas but the rest of everything on that day was questionable. Tower seven falling, the missing plane debris at the pentagon and central PA, the military / president not responding to known threats, if a person with limited flight time could hit a tower, the fact that Bush attacked a country that had nothing to do with the event, and so much more are still, I thought, reasonable questions - especially when looked at together.

This is not about rehashing each theory. Or maybe it is? Have I missed that everything has been debunked?

I mean, I still believe 9/11 was an inside job or at least high level officials, including Bush, were aware it was going to happen and did nothing to stop it. I thought this was still a common opinion of most or many Americans over the age of forty.

 

Is anyone self-hosting a genuinely snappy and robust media hosting service for themselves? What's your setup look like?

The best thing about Apple's Photos on my iDevices is the speed at which everything loads. Even videos (usually) load reasonably fast over LTE. The user interface is decent enough and has a high percentage of features I'd like to have on the go. The on-device AI is awesome (recognizing / organizing faces and objects and locations).

I'd like to get away from iCloud for numerous reasons: the subscription, the chance the UX gets worse, privacy, ease of data ownership and organization, OS independence, etc.

I currently have a QNAP TS-253A with 8GB RAM, Celeron N3160 1.6GHz 4 core, (2) Seagate IronWolf 8TB ST8000VN0022 at about 98% capacity, Raid 1 . I mostly use it for streaming music and videos at home but I also stream music outside the house without issue. Movies don't stream at HD immediately but once they cache up they're good within a minute.

Some people have suggested this hardware should be sufficient. I feel like it's archaic. What do you think?

I've tried Immich but find it to be slow and very limited with features. I've even tested hosting it on Elestio but that didn't go too well. I'm not opposed to paying for offsite services but at that point it just seems like I should stick with iCloud.

I already have Plex running on my NAS so I use that for archiving but it's way too slow to use for looking at pictures, even locally. QNAP has the photo app QuMagie with facial recognition and it seems alright but it's agonizingly slow, if it works at all.

All of the self-hosted apps, in my experience, are well outside the scope of iCloud Photos' speed and feature set. If I could even just test one that matched its speed, I could better assess whatever features they have.

What I'm not sure of is if I'm hitting a wall based on the apps, my hardware, or even my ISP (Speedtest reports upload: 250mpbs). The fact that apps like Plex and QuMagie suck even locally suggests to me it's not an ISP issue (yet).

My NAS is already at capacity so it's time for an upgrade of some sort. While I'm in the mindset, I wanted to see if there's a better product I could use for hosting. My space and finances are not without limits but I'm open to ideas.

I realize I'm not a multi billion dollar company with data centers around the world but I feel like I should be able to piece something together that's relatively comparable for less than an arm and a leg. Am I wrong?

 

I'm on MacOS and typically use Safari as my main browser. I have several other browsers installed on my computer which I use for different things or just to try out from time to time. Orion is one I haven't tried in a while.

I've launched Orion and found that when I previously used it I saved some tabs - one of them being Ebay. I am not signed into my Ebay account in Orion but when I open this tab I'm seeing "Your Recently Viewed Items" and it's very much showing me the items I viewed in Safari just moments earlier.

Orion promotes itself as a privacy focused web browser.

Privacy by design, like no other browser.
Orion has been engineered from ground up as a truly privacy-respecting browser. We did it by embracing a simple principle - Orion is a zero telemetry browser. Your private information will never leave Orion by default.
And to protect your privacy on the web, Orion comes with industry-leading anti-tracking technology as well as a powerful built-in ad-blocker.

How does one browser know what the other browser is doing regardless if I'm, signed into my account on a particular website?

 

I've recently been working to minimize my email clutter, my dependance on certain email providers, and to consolidate services under certain accounts.

I'm down to the following uses:
Apple ID, mydomain-billing/subscriptions, mydomain-official/legal, anon, friends/family, business domain.

I also have a handful of aliases and an account just for newsletters and my RSS app.

I'm curious if others have several email addresses for similar uses or if you use your email client to categorize incoming messages for you. For people who only have one email address, how do you manage this?

 

Regardless of your geographic location, religion, heritage, party affiliation, or your firmness on historical texts; what is it that you believe government's role to be - or should be?

If you'd like to elaborate, what is it you think your local or national government gets right and gets wrong?

I pose the question because I believe this fundamental belief is through which we observe and react to politics. There are things we want or don't want government to do but often legislation or special interests or geographic or political threats get in the way. Our reactions to politics are often, but not wrongly, short-sighted and emotional without context or wisdom. I don't see much dialog around this topic and I wonder if people subscribe to political parties without really considering if the party aligns with what they genuinely believe government's responsibility is or should be.

47
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

Without naming names, there's a well advertised grammar editing tool that's available either as an app download or browser extension. This is something I'd value for a number of reasons (good grammar is important!) but I'm super cautious about anything I'm giving permission to watch what I'm typing.

Ideally, I'd prefer to select text and have it analyzed on-demand using on-device intelligence. I'm on a Mac and it seems like Pages isn't cut out to check grammar. Also, there's no way in heck I'm paying $30 a month for a subscription.

Edit: I just want to acknowledge my request for something I'd value and then saying I don't want to pay for it. I would certainly pay for something if it met my needs but this function isn't something I'd personally value at $30 a month or any monthly subscription ($30 a year sounds reasonable). Moreover, if there's any suspicion of an application using my data for their own profit, they are not getting my money. So, in this case, for the sake of data privacy, I would prefer to pay for something (preferably once - grammar shouldn't need updating).

view more: next ›