kbal @ kbal @fedia.io

I'd appreciate it if everyone could just stop burning fossil fuels, please.

---

Read more

Posts

13

Comments

1,088

Joined

2 yr. ago

cat find /sys -name pp_power_profile_mode

Non-google android is the way to go unless you're looking to be even more adventurous. Which phone you should look for depends which of the OS options you prefer. No pixel means no grapheneOS. LineageOS is the one I chose, runs on quite a few mostly older phones. There are many others.

If by "advanced mode" you mean the "expert" installer, it's not in graphics mode so you wouldn't need the ctrl key.

Edit: Actually there is also a "graphical expert install" apparently, but anyway you may be in text mode. You could instead pick rescue mode from the menu as well.

The "you'd have to prove to someone that you're an adult" is where we disagree. I was talking about parents setting a "user is a child" flag on the devices they let their kids use. They already know who their children are, no proof is necessary. The device can then send an http header to websites for example indicating that it's a child user. That part could be mandated and standardized by law. It's 99% of the problems solved (in legal theory; obviously not every website and app in the world will choose to participate in any of these schemes) with 1% of the dangers.

So long as they don't go overboard with misguided efforts to make it impossible for children to defeat the thing, it seems fine. It's dismaying that all the proposals end up with all these ridiculously dysfunctional ideas instead.

When I hear about "device-based verification" what comes to mind is a device that can be put into some kind of child safety mode, by parents who want to give their children phones or whatever. The device then "knows" whether or not its user is a child without any kind of biometrics or identification.

It has some problems and could case a lot of harm if it's badly designed, but it's the only method that seems close to workable in any conceivable form. Why is it never even talked about in these discussions?

Did an AI write that, or are you a human with an uncanny ability to imitate their style?

Pleroma and Misskey users literally off the chart

Did this highly scientific study contemplate the possibility that this is in part the result of people feeling like they're more justified in turning to piracy if a game is burdened with Denuvo?

Spoiler: It does not, so far as I can tell at first glance. It appears that the model is constructed entirely from DRM-crippled games that got cracked, and then then the estimate of how much revenue would be lost by going DRM-free from the start is extrapolated from that based on the assumption that it makes no difference. Maybe it's true, but the acknowledgement that it "can and often does cause problems, and some developers have chosen to avoid Denuvo altogether because it had such a negative impact on how well their game would run" sort of suggests otherwise.

https://abs.freemyip.com:84/share/_5WuM4QF — be careful following strange links you found on lemmy, but this appears to be the pdf.

It appears to be @linuxprepper@podcast.james.network for those who want to follow it.

To have it post to lemmy I believe you'd just need to address things to e.g. @fediverse@lemmy.world

Isn't this basically just the old trick of estimating (x * y) as (x + y - 1) when x and y are somewhat close to 1?

You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.

Fortunately, the page did its job just fine and was able to tell me to use javascript blocking without needing javascript to do it.

I missed the Internet Archive yesterday when @pluralistic@mamot.fr casually mentioned "Keppler illustrations for Puck" as if we'd all know what that meant and the best-looking link that came up on search was to a collection of them there.

This helps protect our community.

Ah, so it's not you coming up with the stupid excuse that they have legit reasons to think the user might be a nefarious "bot", you're just passing along the stupid excuse as you interpret it from the meaningless message direct from Google. That explains where you got the idea that "viewbots" had anything to do with it, I guess.

It's not just you. I'm tired of the whole team of people who are always standing by to bring out similar excuses any time someone decides that in their quest to stop invidious from existing — or whatever google is actually aiming at — it's acceptable to just mass-block all the VPN users as collateral damage.

I suspect the VPN was used to bot

There are plenty of sources, including even in this thread, indicating that that this is not the problem. Quit making excuses for them.

People have to understand the concept of the fediverse

That's the argument. Do they, though? I sure didn't when I first signed up.

Okay I watched the few seconds of video at the end of a three-hour long video apparently about Facebook where he mentions "federated social media using open decentralized technologies such as activitypub" as it is known. The ratio of time and effort he's inclined to devote to each topic speaks for itself. My understanding of what he says: "Sounds complicated. I'm not touching it until all my friends are already there."

I'm not saying you're a nazi, but if you think the main problem with social media is that everyone calls you a nazi you should consider the possibility that you might be.