• 0 Posts
  • 26 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 10th, 2023

help-circle
  • True. But most good stuff isn’t a solution for everyone. It takes real effort to escape vendor-lockin. Bigtech made sure of that.

    If something is too simple to set up or requires no set up, or comes from a for-profit company, but doesn’t cost anything, then it always suspicious.

    I am just saying that the issue is not with passkey itself, but the individual implementations and that google/twitter/etc. is pushed towards regular users.

    Critiquing passkey because vendor-lockin is like critiquing HTML for allowing ads.





  • I echo the criticism of the term ‘sideloading’, before it started to mean just installing software, I assumed it meant using a separate device or software on the side, like a PC with a debug interface or memory inspection tools, to inject custom code into a running system or software.

    Similarly to preloading libraries into games or other software to replace functions in order to change or enhance the game or software. For instance used with script extenders or game mods. There it is ‘pre’ because the software is not running yet. ‘Side’ would be on running software.

    But installing applications (the distribution doesn’t matter) is in no way side loading.

    And I really hate that the press or whoever picked this term up from apple or google and ran with it without question.

    And now, because that term is so strange and useless in that way, its definition keeps getting changed into whatever the industry needs in order to squeeze out more money and personal data, while taking away the freedom and rights of the owners.





  • Would say that it is the same here as it elsewhere, we need a strong counter narrative and a charismatic person that is fronted by a leading party that manages to deliver that, while cutting through all the bullshit spewed by the demagoguery of the right. We need fighters, not ‘civility’ politics against people that are anti-democratic.

    We need better social policies and actually mean them. Those were what people wanted and often still want when they are baited by the right.

    Right wing mention actual social issues, but “resolve” them with xenophobic “solutions”, while also fabricating issues out of thin air, like immigrant crime, etc. Which suddenly all other parties think they need to address as well.



  • I’m not sure the royals caused this. I guess the main issue is that some democracies become too entrenched, and groups of elites take over the role of nobility, term limits doesn’t help, since to be in a position to become someone, you have to join those that already rule. Capitalism also doesn’t help and even accelerates this process. Abolishing FPTP and instituting ranked choice would be the first step I think on improving democracies, by breaking up these elite groups.




  • What do you mean with “not enforced”? Do you mean that people that find manipulated odometers with proof go to court and then nothing is done?

    I get that it is sometimes difficult to proof a manipulation of the odometer, and that fraud here is pretty wildly spread, and maybe more prevalent in Germany compared to France, but that doesn’t mean that other countries are not doing it.

    I would also agree that anyone should prefer buying from local sellers first, but just saying that this is a special issue that only Germany has to deal, because they do not care about the law and order is wrong.

    This is the same logic that some people on the right have: “Crimes happen more often in cities, and the reason for that is that they do not care about the law there.”






  • Nah, reality doesn’t have a liberal bias. “Liberal” is something that humans invented, and not something that comes from reality or some intrinsic part of nature.

    LLMs are trained on past written stuff by humans, and humans for a long time have not been ridiculously right wing as the current political climate of the US.

    If you train a model on only right wing propaganda, it will not miraculously turn “liberal”, it will be right wing. LLMs also argue not more logical than any propagandist, if they were fed by only propaganda.

    I dislike it immensely when people argue that LLMs are truthful, unbiased, or somehow “know” or can create more that what was put into them. And connecting them with fundamental reality seems even more tech-bro-brained.

    Arguing that “reality” is this or that is also very annoying, because reality doesn’t have any intrisic morales or politics that can be measured by logic or science. So many people argue that their morales are better then someone else’s, because they where given by god, or by science, this is bullshit. They are all derived by human society, and the same is true by whatever “liberal” means.

    And lastly, assuming that some system somehow is “built into reality” shuts down any critique of the system. And critiquing any system in order to improve it is essential for any improvements, which should be part of any progressive thought.


  • Well my point is that pretty much all of our laws are build around ethic values, which are developed within a society. There is no logical or scientific reason that would make killing other people bad, but we still should have strict rules about this.

    Laws are always built around soft things like “what is obscene”, “at what point is someone naked in public”, “How much alcohol can a drink have before it is a alcoholic beverage?”, “did the person die of natural causes, or was killed by some event years ago, that wasn’t properly treated.”

    Society decides what is acceptable and what isn’t and that changes through time and culture.

    Your argument is therefore not a good one, you have to make a case based on ethics.