Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)GA
Posts
0
Comments
225
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • But don't worry, they are stil allowed to make your life and the life of coming generation more and more difficult #climatechange without having to do anything about it (except pretend r&d about "biofuels" and "electric planes" to look cool).

    Edit: fixed typo and clarified

  • I don't get the comment here, they didn't 'express their opinion' about Israel. They behaved like a bunch of lunatics within Google's offices.

    Yes, they did express their opinion on the ongoing genocide. They did that in a fashion that disturbed the workplace - which some comments seem to deem holy ground that should never be disturbed by anything - but they did express their opinion.

    If you want to protest Google's actions send a signed letter of resignation stating the reason, send it to the press and form a union of techies that won't work for companies that work with Israel recursively.

    Iirc they tried some regular stuff before resorting to this method. Also, it's always funny how when people try to change things, they never seem to do it the right way.

    On a side note, I like how none of them mind building mass surveillance tools, pushing ads, Google-China relations, etc... But Israel's genocide is trending, so they jump on that. What a bunch of shallow fucks.

    Well congrats on being less of a hyprocrite than the rest of us.
    The world is shit, nothing goes in the right direction, and some of us are more sensitive to some issues than others.
    I mean I despise alphabet and their business model, but I also understand than people are less horrified by their work being used to serve ads than it being used in a genocide. And again, I hate that ads exist.

    Protestation and strike are supposed to inconvenience the higher ups, please stop advising to use methods that don't disturb anything.

  • First, thanks for doing the work of checking sources for articles posted here, I believe you add value to the conversation.
    This being said, I happen to disagree with you - here's why.

    There seems to be a common misconception about bias and trustability.

    The site you linked to has two ratings: factual reporting and bias.

    Factual reporting is determined by how they do their jobs: do they check their facts and sources before they publish?
    ABC news australia is voted 4/5 on that scale, which I'd say makes them pretty trustworthy - most of the time, they report accurate and verified information.

    Bias is the way you choose the informations you report and how you comment on them. For exemple, while reporting the same information "billionaires are now x% richer than last year", a left biased paper could comment on how non billionaires are getting poorer and a right biased paper could list the billionaires and applaud their financial choices. As a strongly left biased person myself, I'll ignore the right biased paper nit because I think they're lying, but because I don't find their commentary relevant.
    Everybody and every news source is biased, and it's okay. There is usually no neutrality possible when you do journalistic work, because your job is to provide context and commentary around the facts that you report.

    IMO, bias is not a metric helpful to determine credibility, and I find it a little detrimental that the site you linked to has bias and fact checking displayed at the same place without providing a better differentation between the two.

    On a side note, the pursuit of a fictionnal "journalistic neutrality" supposedly devoid of any bias has been and still is weaponized in the french news, where women, muslils or people or color are told they can't report on subjects that they know well because they are supposedly too close to the topic and wouldn't be able to stay neutral. While of course cishet white privileged men can report on those subjects because they are more "objective"...

  • For the execution, can't you configure the fstab with noexec on partitions where the user has write permissions and give the user read-only permissions on the root partition ?

    I think this would be fine for most jobs, the exception being software development where you usually need to execute stuff to test your programs.