scheeseman486

9 ms·

91.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
This won't help if Google/Apple/Microsoft roll out integrity checks for browsers, something which they have already suggested they want to do.
92.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
Wine has some preliminary support for UWP software, never say never.
93.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
It's incredible to see people still confidently say this, to be so sure about something that would take only like a minute of research to find out they are completely wrong.
94.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
No, that's something from the bubble you're in. Most people don't care about privacy (which is not to say that I don't or that it's not important). Mass video surveillance by the state is creepy, but CCTV is everywh
95.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
Thinking about it abstractly like "people don't want headwear displays" ignores that people don't know what smart glasses are or what they would offer them and it's difficult to convey their value without a product
96.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
They knowingly created the systems they built around having centralized control, everyone told them the consequences of doing that, they did it anyway, this is the result, they are responsible.
97.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
I was focused on that one specific argument. I agree that he shouldn't have been taken off the air by the FCC regardless of what he said (unless he explicitly encourages violent action against an individual or group of people be taken,
98.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
> There are a lot of times that Trump says things that people take for granted that what he meant was... but that isn't strictly what he said. It seems to me that maybe 60% of the time, what people are up in arms about are things th
99.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
That isn't the same and you know it. Kimmel made no direct comment about what the shooter was aligned with, only about what the right wing sphere was attempting to frame them as being. Anyone with a moderate grasp of English should be
100.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
> "anything other than one of them" can very easily be interpreted in two ways, one of them leading a person to believe that the adult (not a kid) was somehow "MAGA" Anything can be interpreted in any way you want as
101.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
How is it false? It isn't making the claim that the shooter was MAGA, but commenting on the right wing influencer sphere's recurring habit of accusing mass shooters of being associated with any group other than themselves.
102.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
> What Kimmel Said, and the affiliates broadcasted, was a claim that Charlie Kirk’s assassin was a “maga” supporter. This is the actual quote: "We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to character
103.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
You're talking as if the rubicon hasn't been crossed. These aren't "red flags", they're concrete actions. It isn't the first amendment that needed to hold up, that is just a piece of paper. It's insti
104.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
Rossman was complicit in harassment, harassment (particularly at this scale, driven by their significant viewer base) that would be harmful to literally anyone who would be the target of it. strcat was upset, understandably, and privately c
105.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
It's kind of funny that you're doing the exact same thing the person I initially responded to was doing, making a broad accusation and posting a link as evidence without specifying what it is within that link that you have a probl
106.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
If you don't know anything about the "drama" then maybe you should avoid jumping to conclusions.
107.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
Posting "this is informative, and unfortunate" as a comment to a video with a bunch of inflammatory accusations is giving credence to and expressing approval at the substance of it's content. So no, it isn't as "sim
108.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
Strcat gets harassed based on frivolties, manufactured outrage. There have been repeated accusations of mental health issues without any substantive evidence, including from the person I was just replying to. The evidence they do give is us
109.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
Why is it that whenever someone makes an accusation of bad behaviour from GrapeheneOS devs, they always end the posts with citations that lead to absolutely nowhere? Where, specifically in that first link as I don't consider a Louis Ro
110.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
Should be easy given they haven't made them for over 4 years.
111.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
iPhones did replace tape decks. The mini hi-fi in my living room, my car stereo, my tape and CD walkman, all are now either bluetooth recievers for smartphones or play audio directly from the smartphone. The function wasn't "playi
112.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
> I have no idea where you managed to find any feelings in my replies, and I will ignore the personal attacks. Your username is fsflover and your posts clearly have an ideological bias that favours purely open source solutions even if it
113.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
Smiling Friends and Common Side Effects are hits, My Adventures with Superman seems to be doing okay as well even earning a spin-off show. But I would agree that Adult Swim is an anomaly.
114.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
Instead there's a bunch of other arguments that are just as reasonable which underline why deploying their security focused OS on such a hardware platform would be a waste of their time. This is your refutation? It really seems like yo
115.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
QubesOS is an OS for PCs which have a standardized hardware interface. Support for older systems is basically "free". Smartphones aren't standardized in the same way and the amount of effort it takes to properly support other
116.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
If you download OSMAnd from F-Droid you get all those features for free, except for Android Auto integration which isn't the fault of the developer, but because Google arbitrarily restricts anything not using GMS from working with it.
117.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
No, those don't mean the same thing. All phones are insecure to some extent, most phones compared to GrapheneOS/Pixels are less secure and this has largely proven out whenever there's been leaks of the capabilities of law e
118.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
> the answer is "it's insecure". Can you give me a quote where they outright say this? Because my hunch is that what they actually say is something along the lines of 'because it doesn't have the security require
119.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
I don't think I've ever read any solid refutation of the technical choices of the project, mostly just character attacks, the basis of which are dodgy at best. They're completely up-front about the limitations and catches of
120.
by scheeseman486 1y ago
Just another gimmick phone that sacrifices longevity, reliability and compatibility for the sake of a physical keyboard for an OS that isn't designed for it. The 2010s era of wacky smartphones was in part enabled by the fact that every

More ›