CaptObvious @ CaptObvious @literature.cafe

Posts

3

Comments

800

Joined

2 yr. ago

I disagree that location is necessary functionality.

I don’t really see the need for a location service in the first place. My phone can share my GPS coordinates with first responders in an emergency. For everything else, there’s simply typing in the location I want to know about.

Sadly because I have many friends from China, I’ve come to the conclusion that anything sourced in any way from China is likely a product of forced labor. To the extent possible, these days I avoid anything touched by Chinese industry in any way.

Why is this needed? There’s a reason for Mozilla cancelling their service.

Is “not as bad as Google” really a good goal for a project?

Touché. My bad 😕

Aren’t “privacy-friendly” and “location service” mutually exclusive?

Pardon their debt? Unlikely.

Pardon any conviction for violating state law for non-repayment? No.

Preemptively pardon any conviction for violating federal law for non-repayment? Yes.

The only problem would be that a pardon doesn’t expunge the conviction. So they would still have to deal with a legal record, which may or may not be a real problem.

Useless. Put a face on the problem so that people know who, specifically, to blame for blocking their path to a better life.

Debt indenture is alive and well in the United States of America.

I’m not sure that’s ever been conclusively tested.

Wait. Didn’t the Republican Supreme Court just decided that a president can do anything he damn well wants without consequence? I don’t see the problem. Ignore the 10th and 8th Circuits and implement the program.

This is fucking terrifying. How do we find the membership list and shine a light on them? And how do we make sure politicians know that we disapprove of the company they keep?

Haven’t we learned over the last 25 years that the high road doesn’t work?

Spectrum have the monopoly on internet service in my town. I won’t be engaging with them for anything else.

…you know what literally none of them do? Refer to their users as "he"

You’re either deliberately lying or haven’t bothered to actually look.

someone … would want to see it changed

So, by definition, “someone” has their own agenda.

SIngular they never fell out of usage, but it was considered non-standard English dialect for about three hundred years. Standard formal grammar rules from the 18th century until the last quarter of the 20th defaulted to he/him where gender was unknown or irrelevant. Singular they was grudgingly accepted as standard about ten years ago. Until then, every major style guide forbade singular they in favor of "he or she" or recasting the sentence to avoid pronouns altogether or to semantically justify plural they. Other languages have either found their own solutions or decided that their traditions are good enough and kept them.

Personally, I just avoid pronouns whenever possible, especially if someone is likely to throw a tantrum over an honest mistake due to a lifetime of custom. I've never been particularly upset at singular they, but I also don't take offense if someone follows the older formal grammar rules either.

<shrug>

Love the handle, BTW. :)

I think downloading is against Google’s TOS. Whether that makes it illegal is a question for a lawyer.

That’s not unprofessional. That’s just how English works.

I’ve never used a VPN with it either. But it should work, especially with an exit node in a country where Google has no incentive to/is prohibited from interfering with third party viewers.