comfy @ comfy @lemmy.ml

Posts

29

Comments

959

Joined

3 yr. ago

GOOD LUCK WITH THAT IM BEHIND SEVEN PROXIES

Sure, that's technically true, but I think it's acceptable for this infographic's purpose.

• I don't believe a US company profits from someone using LibreWolf (unless you want to count volunteer labor if someone upstreams their contributions, which doesn't apply to most of the target audience)
• As you said, any other usable browser is going to be based on Chrome, FF or Apple tools. So what should it say? Nothing? Even if it's not perfect, I believe LibreWolf is a far better suggestion than just leaving them with a default choice like Chrome or Edge, or something unusable on sites they want to use.

why not just Linux?

Choice paralysis is a real obstacle for casual users who don't have specific needs (e.g. anti-proprietary values) and don't want to know what a kernel or a binary blob is, we've even seen this with Lemmy and other Fediverse options. So giving a specific distro suggestion is effective for this, and then later enabling them to move to other distros if there's one more suited to them.

Linux Mint is generally well-received by beginner users, especially those moving from Windows which is similar enough to Cinnamon. Even if it's not the ideal distro, it's one which I believe casual users are less likely to reject. Hardware is more likely to 'just work', including graphics cards and non-free codecs. Non-free software readily appears in the app store, which is important if users are still dependent on them (e.g. their hobby group only uses Discord). While I personally believe in, support and create FOSS software, I don't see how FSF-endorsement is important to the target audience, and if it risks them complaining that their NVIDIA GPU is acting weird or they're having trouble installing proprietary tools they need for work, then I'd compromise and give them the smoothest reasonably-free option possible and allow them to decide to move to another distro later when they're more familiar with Linux and how easy it is to try out distros.

This one was making a child with an HIV-positive parent resistant to HIV, so it's a bit better than 731 torture.

I have problems with the doctors' way of doing so, but their act was to allow an informed consenting(? it's complicated) couple with an HIV-positive parent to have a child resistant to HIV. It was problematic, yes, but very different to the war crime experiments, much of which was simply about morbid curiosity and torture.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/He_Jiankui_affair

Laws were changed after this incident:

In 2020, the National People's Congress of China passed Civil Code and an amendment to Criminal Law that prohibit human gene editing and cloning with no exceptions

So, in case you actually meant that weird ignorant remark you made about Uyghurs, the answer is no and no.

634 is the current record, I believe.

No wonder I have no more motivation to be a good worker anymore.

Useful resource: https://specificsuggestions.com/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Zionism#Early_Jewish_anti-Zionism

Not since we invented writing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender#History

You forgot the most important step: report!

UK has a solid subvertising movement, I love it.

So you are against democracy.

No. I am against the simplistic idealistic approach of just unconditionally allowing the most popular candidates to rule, especially given the surrounding circumstances like mass media propaganda turning this nice idea into a pay-to-win scheme, and the broken implementations in most countries (FPTP, systematic voter disenfranchisement, etc.). Just look at how that turns out in the USA, repeatedly. There are many other ways democracy can be structured. Most 'democractic countries' have extremely broken federal electoral systems which fail to represent the voting people, despite it seeming democratic on the surface with elections.

Who gets to decide the leaders now? If you live in a modernized country and a federal candidate does not have the support of the rich owning class, they won't have much chance at competing with airtime on television and news, support of paid 'influencers' and other celebrities, commercial advertising spots, social media astroturfing campaigns and all the other ways to make a candidate seem important enough to have a chance of winning. The bottom line is, realistically speaking, the only viable candidates at leading on a federal level are those promoted by the ultra-rich, every other candidate and party is fringe. I assert that you effectively having to choose between candidates pre-selected by the owning class is not a valid democracy. Even if you have the right and the freedom to do due diligence and vote for a minor party which is closer to your views, that freedom is ultimately useless in a popularity contest influenced by mass media. That minor party, in real life, never had a fair chance of winning, no matter how popular their policies are.

I don't know anything about paid subreddits, but I'm talking about the notorious and overreaching censorship of Luigi Mangeoni, including people getting warnings for simply upvoting those posts. This was mentioned in some mainstream news articles so it's a reasonably big wave.

Glancing at the article, this quote stood out:

This regulation takes effect on September 1, 2025, and will compel all service providers (i.e., AI LLMs) to “add explicit labels to generated and synthesized content.”

...the leaders generally get to make the laws, so I don't think legality is a useful safeguard.

I dont think its good, but its people right to have the leader they choose.

Well, that's all well and good in an idealistic liberalist abstract, but in reality it often leads to (and Romania's own history did lead to) mass suffering, extermination of minorities, and getting invaded and occupied by the Soviet Union after their fascist leader Codreanu allied with Hitler. So, it's best nipped in the bud, no matter what the majority believe.

Șoșoacă, in fact, is under investigating for commemorating Codreanu in public.

Trying to fight against the rights of the majority of the population is a dangerous battle only previously tried by authoritarian dictatorships and similar regimes.

That's definitely not limited to authoritarian dictatorships. Seeing as you're posting from an aussie instance, Whitlam's dismissal comes to mind, along with lockdown laws (whether the majority approved or not).

Also worth mentioning, in Romania, political left and rights seem to be flipped.

The left-right framework just isn't useful. As you've pointed out, it's relative and changes massively between each country.

This video helps explain in more depth and proposes a more useful, effective political model: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nPVkpWMH9k

Relevant: ^[source]

If we're lucky, we might avoid the World Wars which made many other revolutions possible.