cyberphobe

9 ms·

31.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Yeah probably, but wouldn’t really be sufficiently punitive to really deal with the problem. It should be a % of the abuser’s revenue
32.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Seems like censoring a website known for hosting hate speech is a bit different to censoring mastodon
33.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
the conflation of Mastodon and ActivityPub continues
34.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
aw thanks! I follow you on mastodon and it’s been great watching the updates as hachyderm grows
35.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
These comments make me want to log off for a bit. Post: we hit scaling issues caused by our failing disks and running image hosting and databases over NFS HN: It’s obviously Ruby on Rails fault
36.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Whatever you need to tell yourself to make your little delusion work. Obviously the banned accounts were not calling for any form of violence, otherwise the bans wouldn't have been news
37.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
By what metric was Twitter previously controlled by the "other team", by which you presumably the far left? Before Elon owned them, they were bending over backwards to allow right wing accounts ([0] for example), and they frequent
38.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
https://www.newsweek.com/activists-accuse-elon-musk-banning-... mentions a few, although there are far more.
39.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
This is like a big private club that allows anyone to enter and has effectively taken the place of a town square, due to (among other things) lack of such a public project. It ought to be owned by the government, but we've privatized
40.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
excellent argument, you sure changed my mind
41.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Elon is pretty clearly unbanning violent right-wing extremists while banning rule-following accounts on the left, sometimes transparently at the direction of the right wingers. Why do you insist on pretending anything else?
42.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
> Police say they don’t have enough manpower to stop such street takeovers Classic overfunded police department bullshit
43.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
if you have a problem with this: simply be born into wealth, then you might be able to do something about this.
44.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
GP is trying to vaguely gesture at imagined hypocrisy, has no actual point
45.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
surprise surprise kiwifarms being brought up but not being compared to the to the original claims.
46.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Obviously kwififarms defenders such as yourself try to muddle the facts: Google isn't taking down any websites or being asked to take them down, just delisting them from their own indexes. GP didn't claim this either, just said th
47.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
I'm sure your useless statement will be of great relief to the victims of the various megacorporations that control many of the critical components of our society.
48.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
You can't. They have no financial reason to give a shit about you. If screwing you over is more profitable than not, or looks like it probably will be, they will screw you over.
49.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Seems unlikely given their long history of adjudicating precisely this kind of dispute.
50.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
example? EDIT: not that Google isn't in the wrong here, this just feels like you're trying to push some other political agenda.
51.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Police being in life threatening situations is a bullshit excuse. None of these killings have the police been in a life threatening situation. They’re just murderous thugs, we should stop buying them expensive toys and start locking them up
52.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Sure hope that control protocol is secure.
53.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
ML driven killing that much more surgically and precisely targets black and brown people, rather than having the cops trying to guess
54.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Usually the high stress situation is manufactured entirely or significantly heightened by the officers involved
55.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
yeah I noticed that. Quite a reversal from their previous position, which was incredibly clear. I wonder if they'll extend this policy to other groups that have previously been shut down for doing the same thing (F-Droid being the obvi
56.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
No one is forcing you to use their deb
57.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Signal isn’t saying no one can use the word signal. The problem arises when you use all of their branding together in such a way that could plausibly fool someone into thinking it’s their software, which very much appears to have happened h
58.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Sounds great as long as they get proper permission to distribute the software they’re distributing. Otherwise it’s just another untrusted party in the supply chain
59.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
It’s true, they should distribute a .deb that ensures the repo and key are installed so it gets updates. However, your suggestion that they should just capitulate and allow 3rd parties to violate trademark seems like a pretty bad take.
60.
by cyberphobe 4y ago
Will a similar line of communication be established with other open source distribution platforms (such as F-Droid) that would also like to distribute binaries and call them Signal?

More ›