Skip Navigation

Posts
67
Comments
1,022
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • I never heard of one shooting up a school church or whatever.

    First off, one must be very careful of generalizing to an entire group from the actions of a small sample [1]. Using the metric of whether there have been trans people who have engaged in mass shootings is quite reductionist, and is a faulty generalization — if I am to interpret what you said to mean that "conservatives" are "against" all trans people because they think that they are all responsible for "shooting up" schools and churches. Second, to address your belief, to my knowledge, there has been at least one instance of a school shooter being trans [2].

  • Why does it seem most people, mainly conservatives, against Trans people?

    I think it's important to establish the validity of the claim, and the assumptions being made, since you cited no sources, nor did you provide any definitions, nor did you specify any assumptions; I will presume that by "conservative", you are referring to American Republicans.

    Why does it seem most people [...][are] against Trans people?

    It does not appear that "most people" (I assume you mean "the majority of people") are "against trans people" (I'm not entirely sure exactly what you mean by this, so I will assume it means not being in favor of protecting trans people from discrimination) [1.2][1.1].

    Why does it seem [...] conservatives [...][are] against Trans people?

    It does seem that the majority of Republicans are against trans protections [1.1].

    ADDENDUM (2024-11-23T06:49Z): Could someone who's downvoting this please tell me why they are doing so? I'm rather confused about what the rationale could be. I didn't even state any opinions; I was only fact checking. Was I perhaps too abrasive sounding? I wasn't intending to be rude.

  • I know I can post and be the change I seek.

    Imo, this is your answer. I'm not sure exactly what other solution you want. Content will not appear on Lemmy without someone first posting it. Advertising the platform to help draw people in is also important.

  • I enabled logging in the Ntfy app, and, upon receiving a message in Element X, it showed the Matrix notification push message in plain text in the logs. If Ntfy indeed doesn't know anything about Unified Push and is just the medium through which a Unified Push message travels, then I would think that it wouldn't be the service decrypting the message, yet it is decrypted in the logs.

  • So, in this image, if the application server, the push server, and the distributor app have nothing to do with Unified Push, then where exactly does it come into play? What exactly is it doing? I was of the belief that Unified Push standardized the notification communication protocol with the application server, replacing things like Google Firebase (which, iiuc, is equivalent to the push server in the above diagram, and the distributor app being built into the phone — ie Android). What's also confusing me in all this is what exactly a push gateway is doing. Ntfy, for example, implemented a Matrix Gateway [1][2], but I'm not exactly sure the point of that if it's not doing anything with Unified Push (Matrix uses it's own push API [3])

  • So, for example, if one were to register Unified Push notifications with Matrix using Ntfy, the creation of the encrypted Unified Push notifications would be done by the Matrix Unified Push Gateway which then gets handed off to Ntfy? Is there a way to confirm that the received notification is indeed encrypted?

  • TL;DR: I blame FPTP.


    Hm, I'd argue that this is a byproduct of the spoiler effect — I think it's due to strategic voting. I think that it's likely not due to people consciously voting against their own interests to benefit the rich (assuming that they indeed do this ­— ie that voting to benefit the rich is against their interests), but instead that the entities that support these sorts of beliefs, also tend to align with other beliefs that are more important to the voters, and "benefiting the rich", while possibly perceived negatively, is a sacrifice that the voters are willing to make.

  • If this sort of thing was commonplace, I wonder if this overtly male-focused advertising (I say "male-focused" as males, who are majority heterosexual, would be the largest collective that would be attracted to this sort of advertising) had anything to do with video games being stereotypically associated with males. Perhaps it's a sort of positive feedback. If so, I wonder what the initial bias towards males was.

  • Yes, they can read the data.

    Isn't this contradicting the Unified Push spec? It states:

    Push message: This is an array of bytes (ByteArray) sent by the application server to the push server. The distributor sends this message to the end user application. It MUST be the raw POST data received by the push server (or the rewrite proxy if present). The message MUST be an encrypted content that follows RFC8291. Its size is between 1 and 4096 bytes (inclusive). [1]

  • Isn't this contradicting the Unified Push spec? It states:

    Push message: This is an array of bytes (ByteArray) sent by the application server to the push server. The distributor sends this message to the end user application. It MUST be the raw POST data received by the push server (or the rewrite proxy if present). The message MUST be an encrypted content that follows RFC8291. Its size is between 1 and 4096 bytes (inclusive). [1]

  • What's interesting, and is confusing me about this, is that Ntfy does not adhere to this [1]. I'm not sure how this can be.

    ::: spoiler References

    1. "End-to-end encryption (E2E) between clients (Android app, CLI, web app)". binwiederhier. ntfy/binwiederhier. GitHub. Published: 2021-12-29T02:07:36Z. Accessed: 2024-11-22T05:04Z. https://github.com/binwiederhier/ntfy/issues/69. :::
  • The app that wants to provide the notifications would then be said to use UnifiedPush, right?

  • I will preface by saying that I am not casting doubt on your claim, I'm simply curious: What is the rationale behind why it would be so unlikely for such an exploit to occur? What rationale causes you to be so confident?

  • Looks like a Fractal Node 304?

    Yep! I've found that the case is possibly a little too cramped for my liking — I'm not overly fond of the placement of the drive bay hangars — but overall it's been alright. It's definitely a nice form factor.

  • It wasn't a deliberate choice. It was simply hardware that I already had available at the time. I have had no performance issues of note as a result of the hardware's age, so I've seen no reason to upgrade it just yet.

  • Main Server

    Services

    • Jellyfin
    • FreshRSS
    • Borg
    • Immich
    • Nextcloud AIO
    • RSS-Bridge

    Hardware

    • CPU: Intel Core i5-4460
    • GPU: Nvidia GeForce GTX 760
    • Memory: Kingston KHX1600C10D3/8G (8GB DDR3-1600)
    • Motherboard: ASUS H81I-PLUS

    OS

    • Ubuntu 22.04.5 LTS

    Reverse Proxy

    Services

    • Caddy

    Hardware

    • Rasbperry Pi 4 Model B Rev 1.5 (2GB)

    OS

    • Debian 12

    Router

    Hardware

    • TP-Link Archer C7 AC1750

    OS

    • OpenWRT 23.05.5
  • Do y'all actually read articles or just the headline?

    Both. I first read the headline (while taking it with an immense grain of salt due to, by my experience, the commonplace usage of clickbait/misleading headlines) to see if the article may interest me, then, if so, I read the article to either effectively fact-check the article's own headline, or to actually get more detail on what the headline summarized ­— though, it certainly feels like it is more often than not the former. Sometimes, however, the headline, on it's own, is enough, but that seems rare — logically, it is in a news company's best interest to get people to read the article (if it is assumed that they get income from people reading the article's content) so they would be incentivized to make the headline as provoking or nebulous as possible to maximize the probability that one will click on it.


    Its just crazy cabinet nominees every time. Wars happening. Nothing I can control.

    Personally, I believe that it's, at the very least, important to be peripherally aware of what's happening in the world, but one must be careful to recognize what they can and can't control — what is worth fretting over and what isn't. Inundating oneself with the knowledge of any number of horrible things that may have happened somewhere in the world in a given day is generally of no help to anyone and only serves to degrade one's own mental state.


    Y’all actually read all this shit? How does anyone have the energy?

    The most tiring thing, personally, is fact checking. It is tiring to feel like the majority of my interactions with news articles that are shared are that of dealing with misleading claims and misdirected or misinformed reactions. It certainly feels like the majority offloads the scrutiny of data onto the minority.

  • For clarity, I'm not claiming that it would, with any degree of certainty, lead to incurred damage, but the ability to upload unvetted content carries some degree of risk. For there to be no risk, fedi-safety/pictrs-safety would have to be guaranteed to be absolutely 100% free of any possible exploit, as well as the underlying OS (and maybe even the underlying hardware), which seems like an impossible claim to make, but perhaps I'm missing something important.