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/)SP
Posts
3
Comments
298
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Which politicians (supposedly from foreign countries?) trigger a better sentiment?

    Good question. Most any, really, but you probably didn't mean literally only just "better".
    If I had to look within the CDU/CSU and had to settle for "not entirely filled with contempt for human life" I suppose I'd end up with Merkel, to my own surprise. More contemporary Serap Güler, maybe.
    I don't generally find myself triggered by Nouripour.
    If I increased the requirements to "Not fundamentally blighted by neoliberal economics" I think I'd have to go back to Gysi and Fischer. Bodo Ramelow, if need be. Honorary mention for Martin Sonneborn, because even if I disagree with him I can at least get a laugh out of it.

    Internationally the pickings are slim. I think I generally don't mind what Sanna Marin has to say. For about a year I was smitten by Abiy Ahmed, just like the rest of the world. That went away quickly. I'd like to see another Vaclav Havel one day.

    I could live with Albert Schweitzer and Fred Rogers rising from the grave to erect an unlikely global totalitarian dual dictatorship.

  • But this breaks automatic updates without entering the BIOS

    Maybe I'm misunderstanding a technical aspect here, but wouldn't only the bootloader need to be signed? To my understanding a tamper-proof system already assumes full disk-encryption anyway, so any kinds of automatic updates would be happening in a black box anyway, wouldn't it?

    and is just not feasible except for the PC on your desk at home

    That's probably a different and more value-based discussion and I'm quite sure you didn't intend it that way, but it's hard for me to put into words how much this sentence structure offends me 😅
    A benefit to the users in front of their personal computers can never be an exception, it is (... ought to be) always the point of everything, the end goal. Having a solution that benefits end users and puts other entities at a disadvantage is always preferable over a solution that puts end users at a disadvantage for the benefit of other entities.

  • As almost always the answer is “it depends”.
    From a security perspective you want to make sure that what your system boots is trusted and not tampered with by a third party. If your threat model includes people with physical access or malicious software (root kits) manipulating your operating system, then secure boot can help mitigating if you set it up correctly.
    If that’s none of your concern, then you probably shouldn’t bother with it.

    It's such a silly system. Could have just had it in a way that automatically trusts only whatever system(s) is/are installed while the BIOS is unlocked so any user benefits from secure boot as soon as they set a BIOS password.

  • The alternative is no morality at all. And in that case, you’re either following the law out of love for your state and/or fellow human, or because you don’t want to be sent to prison for breaking the law.

    You're going in a circle there. If individually define moral action as "an action that cannot be derived from anything but some kind of supernatural being", then yeah, you can dismiss anything else on normative grounds. But then what's the point of asking "How can something be morally wrong if there is no God?"?

  • Which countries are that in your view?

    Might be more of a thought experiment at this point. I worry that, with a global advertising industry now operating at the same scale as the entire petrochemical sector, whatever bastions of democracy may be left around the world are on the clock either way.

  • Ironical since left wing terrorism is a real issue in Europe that is more prevalent than right wing one ( if u consider Islamic one isn’t right wing which funny enough is supported by leftist and fight by righty)

    There is some kind of misunderstanding here at some point, because I cannot follow you.
    Here's a good rule of thumb: If, anwhere, members of minorities can expect to experience day-to-day disadvantages and violence, then there's a right-wing extremism problem. If, anwhere, members of the dominant socio-economic group can expect to experience day-to-day disadvantages and violence, well, that's a left-wing extremism problem.
    Now... which of these problems exists and which one doesn't?

  • How it will be implemented: Law enforcement now have to waste their resources previously spent on going after the far-right for their hate crimes on going after the far left.
    Yeah always wonder why freedom of speech wasn’t an issue while it was targeted toward a narrow position that you didn’t agree with

    There's no Ying-Yang situation going on here. Don't mistakenly equate "ostracising an objectively incorrect thing" with "not agreeing with a narrow position" 😜
    Right-wing extremism is an actual problem, left-wing extremism is an imaginary one. Nobody likes to see resources wasted on imaginary problems.

  • Sounds like a pretty good framework for keeping private enterprise from taking over the political system like we see happening in some European and American countries. It would also help with holding the owner class in check. Countries that haven’t lost control over their democratic political systems yet could learn from this.

    Doesn't that just shift the power dynamic from an owner class to a political elite? It's not obvious to me how this would change anything for the populations in countries that have lost the control over their democratic political systems or in countries whose political systems were never particularly democratic to begin with - either way the power lies with a small ruling class.

  • Op was on lemm.ee before moving, his contributions aren’t a recent thing.

    Ah, I see - do you just happen to know them or is there a way to check for this kind of thing?

    If he would be what you call a repost-bot the links would likely be from more random low-quality sources and also wouldn’t be neatly posted to the most relevant community.

    I might be wrong about the nature of the account, that's why I'm asking after all, but I wouldn't agree with that definition at all.
    What I see here is an account with 264 Posts (8 per day!) and a mere 3 Comments and that just doesn't look like a person interested in engaging with other persons but like an automatism to deliberately pump content into communities - which in turn rings my alarm bells.

  • Enlighten me, fellow community members: This appears to be just some kind of recently created repost-bot that automatically and immediately links articles - is this considered spam around here and should be reported or is this desired behavior?

  • Interesting, how does that work? Is it some kind of modified Android version with more restrictions? I'd assumed that unlike the usual smart TV's you could at least freely install Software on the Shield. I mean, in the end it's still an operating system developed by an advertising corporation, but Firefox+uBlock Origin has so far been bulletproof even on Android phones, at least to my understanding.

  • LocalLLaMA @sh.itjust.works

    Local Voiceover/Audiobook generation

    Jellyfin: The Free Software Media System @lemmy.ml

    Is there any benefit in passing through an old-ish GPU to the server VM?

    Information Security @infosec.pub

    Smart card/Yubikey labeling - yay/nay?