pjhenry1216 @ pjhenry1216 @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

938

Joined

2 yr. ago

Is there a Matrix Bridge for RCS? RCS is neither SMS nor is it Google Chat.

Edit: this isn't to claim Beeper is better. Just stating that technically there is something on offer that Matrix Bridges doesn't support. I think I'd still prefer Matrix with Bridges over Beeper.

Edit: apparently Beeper is based on Matrix. Can't confirm whether their own repo would introduce any dependencies for their bridge that isn't in the main repo for Matrix. So it's hard to say.

Think it works via the Google Home app and being on the same WiFi. I know Chromecast devices always need a phone at some point to get set up. Not sure about androidtv. Oddly this doesn't seem to have gone out to all devices. I have Chromecast with Google TV and it still has an onscreen keyboard. But then again, I guess they don't need to force me to use a phone with it.

yes and no. It is available it multiple forms.

There's a decent bit in their site as to how fighting fingerprinting by trying to be more common can make you still stand out, so mullvad may not work out depending on how it implements this concept. Randomizing fingerprinting sounds like it could work (I haven't researched it so I don't have enough info to agree or disagree, but sounds legit at the very least) and expecting their report to understand that is beyond the scope of the tool. I mean, you couldn't actually test that method is effective without recording it over multiple sessions/days/etc. Sure you want a unique fingerprint, but seeing a unique fingerprint once doesn't mean it's working.

That's not the alternative. An alternative would be hiring people because it offers some benefit to the company.

That's fine. That's my point though. The intentions are entirely different. I don't think any company is actively worried about ensuring people are employed. The end result of a bunch of other motivations may be the same, but my statement is about the why.

I'd have to disagree with this. Why would all companies just unilaterally agree to waste money so people can make a living. If that were the drive, they'd also pay thriving wages, etc.

So, she did do something, just not her specific job duty because she got fired after 6 months for a TikTok video. She was doing a bunch of training and was told to learn how things are done at Meta. At a large company, I would not expect a new hire to do much of anything for the first few months as they learned the ropes of how things worked. The more forward facing, theonger I'd expect. Hiring people? That's forward facing. You're choosing who to spend money on. Developers? Customers see the application. I wouldn't let them touch anything significant for a bit. I'm sure it applies to other areas as well.

I don't know about "decentralized" as centralization is a driving influence in cost of marketing. Amazon is efficient because of every step of the way is centralized, from store front to the warehousing to the shipping. Sure there are some products that don't ship by Amazon, but they're usually at a cost disadvantage unless they're unique. Plus payment processing is centralized and allows for consumer protections which wouldn't be possible with something like crypto.

Amazon could be dethroned, but it would require very specific circumstances and unlikely wouldn't be by a privacy minded entity.

Amazon is cheap because personal data subsidizes a lot. If they couldn't sell targeted sponsor ads to you, they'd make that revenue up elsewhere.

This is one of the dumbest articles I ever read. The entire government changed. Taliban can be dictators. The US couldn't. On top of this, they essentially had two years to switch to wheat before this occurred. Something that was less economically feasible over two years ago due to an unfortunate food shortage in the area now.

Asking why someone couldn't get something done as quickly as a dictator is something a naive child asks.

Something the US couldn't do under the previous government. Plus many switched to wheat beforehand anyway due to food shortages. The US didn't rule Afghanistan and had to work within Afghanistan's government. That government is gone. The Taliban can act like a dictator. Sure, armed with little more than sticks, but farmers had a two year lag beforehand to switch to wheat. This ban wasn't just announced it's old. It was just never enforced til now. I mean, it's ridiculous to compare the two situations. If the US did the same, at the time they were there, there would have been total economic collapse plus basically commiting war crimes.

Are you suggesting since the US did that, they should institute unconstitutional laws in the US as well? Your argument is seriously that they did some bad things so let's do worse?

The US government didn't really say anything. A government funded non-profit that is supervised by an independent US agency said it. It has the same freedom of press as NPR would theoretically. Authorities in the EU is worried as well. Basically, without heroin, they think everyone will use fentanyl instead which is far worse. This is what occurred the last time there was a heroin shortage. So, ultimately, this will backfire greatly. And moreover, the ban was announced two years ago. When announced, it was believed it would actually be completed at a time that would have caused immense hardship on Afghans that were growing it, hence the claims the Taliban was turning a blind eye. Because they effectively were.

This is an extremely biased article against the US for some reason. There's a difference when drug production was essentially being done out in the open and then suddenly stopped. Satellites can easily find where the poppy fields were. You can't do this with marijuana, nor do I think you should. And on top of that, the drug problem the US has is importation or small scale manufacture. Its an entirely different problem. And again, the war on drugs was never meant to do what this article seems to imply.

I'm surprised at this article and it's conclusions. They're extremely deceptive, biased, and not entirely accurate.

I mean, it's basically going to be as strong as TLS. Unless the digital signers cert gets leaked, I don't see how.

I have my doubts that people should comment on things they clearly haven't read, but here we are.

Ugh. I'm sorry. I apologize. I don't argue with children.

Thanks for the reminder of why I shouldn't play chess with pigeons. They just knock the pieces off the board and claim they won.

That whole end bit was added later. This isn't rocket science. You'd know that since multiple people replied due to the unclear nature of the comment, including mine.

Jfc. I don't know why I'm even bothering with you. Are you like their little brother or something? Ffs.

The information Felt released wasn't just something only he knew. It's simply that it wasn't enough on its own and no one was chasing down the proper leads due to the coverup in play. The White House is the government. The administration partook in the coverup. Its just fewer people in the government being part of a coverup. Anything that's illegal is still illegal. The government is behind both, it's simply a matter of how much and what parts of the government.

The guy spammed a few threads talking about how great AirTags are and gave no context. Beyond that, that isn't what his comment said. It didn't even claim they were the most popular. You had to infer that on your own. I'm confused why you're confused. Probably because you joined a conversation, made a dumbass accusation that no question was asked, and are now backpedaling to still look like anything you say makes sense.

This isn't fruitful anymore. Enjoy defending people talking about how great Apple is unsolicited.