0x815 @ 0x815 @feddit.de

Posts

1,027

Comments

213

Joined

2 yr. ago

You're welcome 🙃

The first ouside US and Europe that come to my mind are https://eurasianet.org and https://hongkongfp.com

The sites https://globalvoices.org and https://restofworld.org cover news from around the globe.

Edit: Not to forget the news from the Global South at https://www.ipsnews.net

Yeah, same thing with Tor. I tried to access beehaw.org in the browser, but got blocked by CrowdSec 😔

There is an interesting story about their survival.

Indigenous knowledge, bravery, vigilance

Thirteen-year-old Lesly Mukutuy was able to identify edible fruits, find suitable water and avoid dangerous plants and animals thanks in part to knowledge handed down to her by [her grandmother] Valencia.

“We have to recognise not only her bravery but also her leadership,” the minister of defence, Iván Velásquez, said on Sunday after a visit to Bogotá’s military hospital, where the children are being treated for malnutrition and minor injuries. “We can say that it was because of her that her three younger siblings could survive by her side, thanks to her care and her knowledge of the jungle.”

I fully agree.

@altz3r0

ironically portrayed much of the authoritarianism we see today in capitalist countries.

Which "capitalist countries" do you mean? I'd agree there is dangerously growing surveillance in Western Europe and the US, but this surveillance is much worse in self proclaimed anti-capitalist and "anti-western" countries like China or Russia or Iran.

I'd say 1984 is anti-totalitarian, and that has nothing to do with a particular political ideology.

[...] the Commission will take measures to avoid exposure of its corporate communications to mobile networks using Huawei and ZTE as suppliers. It will take relevant security measures so as not to procure new connectivity services that rely on equipment from those suppliers, and will work with Member states and telecom operators to make sure that those suppliers are progressively phased out from existing connectivity services of the Commission sites.

It seems to get better of late, but slowly. We can get an idea about how GDPR is handled across the EU in the GDPR enforcement tracker or in the GDPR Trap Map. Amongst others, the latter says for example:

Departing from the standard in most procedural laws in Germany, Article 20 of the Bavarian Data Protection Law codifies that a complainant may not get access to the files in a complaints procedure. This means that the data subject is very much limited in effectively challenging wrong arguments by the controller. The provision seems to violate fair procedures rights.

Edit for an addition: There are many sites to check a website's GDPR compliance, e.g. Fathom's, and to find trackers and cookies there is also The Markup's Blacklight. I'm not aware whether these tools are known by everyone already.

I hope she won't get a sentence, but I am not a lawyer for expressing an informed legal opinion. The point I make is that we know in the meantime that the oil industry has been downplaying climate change and its related health issues for decades, although they new about it from their own research in the 1980s already. And no one faces any consequences. As a legal layman I can't say whether that's legal, but I don't feel it's right.

As an EU citizen, I'm often disappointed how these things are applied. New rules may be fine, but often it takes a really really long time here until the necessary changes take an effect in the real world.

The GDPR is a good example imo. We have it for 5 years now, but even many public authorities still don't comply with it. So I feel that many things are just written on paper.

Here is a file to give an idea what the data looks like (xlsx-file): https://web.archive.org/web/20230525225541mp_/https://xandr-be-prod.zoominsoftware.io/bundle/monetize_monetize-standard/page/attachments/data-marketplace-buyer-overview/data_marketplace_public_segments_pricing_05212021.xlsx

This is somewhat related:

The CIA Is Begging Congress to Please Keep Spying on U.S. Citizens Legal

High-level officials from the CIA, FBI, and NSA are testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee today, asking Congress to continue allowing the agency to spy on the communications of US citizens. They are urging Congress to reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA)—one of the nation’s most hotly contested government surveillance programs. Intelligence agencies have long cited the powerful 2008 FISA provision as an invaluable tool to effectively combat global terrorism, but critics, including an increasing number of lawmakers from both parties, say those same agencies have morphed the provision into an unchecked, warrantless domestic spying tool. The provision is set to expire at the end of this year.

That's what I thought, too. If the police needs a judge's sign-off as collecting such data without a warrant would violate the Fourth Amendment, why then are private companies allowed to do so? I'm not a lawyer, but this is strange to me. As a legal layman I would say that private companies and data brokers are violating the law, right?

They may not care, and we don't care that they don't care. These things should be reported imo.

PeerTube

Happy video watching without tracking 🙂

but once the tech is good enough

What makes you think that the tech is already good enough for being tested in the public? The fact is that the incidents revealed by the investigation is much higher than what Tesla has published, Tesla is holding back a lot of relevant data, no one (except Tesla) can say how safe this tech is and whether or not it should be allowed to be tested on the streets.

The fact that many or most car accidents are caused by human error and a lot of other critical points here simply don't matter here as they have nothing to do with the issue. This is not some application on your smartphone that you can test at your own risk while it is still in beta. This is a car. It kills people, and Tesla is obviously unwilling to disclose the data even to the authorities. As long as this is the case, this tech should not be allowed to be tested in the public space.

@comic_skillset

Why didn't they even try to do an apples to apples comparison?

Maybe because the data released by Tesla is incomplete and biased as it appears to serve its sales rather than safety?

It's the company and Elon Musk himself that are frequently making bold statements while it seems that not even the authorities have the data to verify the claims. As the article says:

In a March presentation, Tesla claimed Full Self-Driving crashes at a rate at least five times lower than vehicles in normal driving, in a comparison of miles driven per collision. That claim, and Musk’s characterization of Autopilot as “unequivocally safer,” is impossible to test without access to the detailed data that Tesla possesses.

@freshhotbiscuits

Even if they hurt someone, the point is that it harmed maybe 0.1% of the people that would have been hurt in traditional vehicles.

Where have you got this number from?

This is exactly what I meant in my comment before. Anyone throws out a number and claims it is true. I don't think we should let perfect be the enemy of good, but here are people's lives on the line. We need independent and reliable data.

@BlameThePeacock @tango_octogono Fair, and in principle I agree. But it's not (only) the people who miss the point and set an impossible standard but foremost Mr Elon Musk himself. He has been promoting Tesla's autopilot and even its self-driving capability for years (although the folks at Tesla will certainly know that the latter won't come anytime soon).

Tesla video promoting self-driving was staged, engineer testifies

A 2016 video that Tesla (TSLA.O) used to promote its self-driving technology was staged to show capabilities like stopping at a red light and accelerating at a green light that the system did not have, according to testimony by a senior engineer.

One of the things we needed for setting reasonable expectations regarding this tech is more reliable information also from Tesla and its CEO. As long as the company itself is frequently flooding the market with unrealistic "news" about this tech, it is good that there are independent investigations imo.