![](https://media.kbin.social/media/72/d0/72d0a3bb7a04c3bca4817d99bbd840df1dcdb6fd549d031f0b2e8785174accee.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/h1ChnLuBHr.png)
Signal is the same in that regards.
Signal is the same in that regards.
Yes. The thing is that then you are no longer anonymously using yt-dlp.
The next step would be trying to detect that case… maybe adding captchas when there’s even a slight suspicion.
Perhaps even to the point of banning users (and then I hope you did not rely on the same account for gmail or others).
It’ll be a cat and mouse situation. Similar as it happened with Twitter, there are also third party apps, but many gave up.
I wouldn’t be surprised if at some point they start doing something like what Twitter did and require login to view the content.
The thing is… they are not really disagreeing if they are not saying something that conflicts or challengues the argument.
They just mistakenly believe they disagree when in fact they are agreeing. That’s what makes it stupid.
If you don’t like it, vote with your wallet
I’d say more: don’t use Youtube if you don’t like it.
It’s very hypocritical to see how everyone bashes at Youtube, Twitter, Facebook, Uber, etc. and yet they continue using it as if life would be hell without the luxury of those completelly non essential brands. If you truly don’t like them, just let them die… look for alternatives. Supporting an alternative is what’s gonna hurt them the most if what you actually want is to force them to change.
There’s also a lot of videos from rich Youtube creators complaining about Youtube policies, and yet most of them don’t even try to set up channels on alternative platforms. Many creators have enough resources to even launch their own private video podcast services, and yet only very few do anything close to even attempt that.
deleted by creator
From the actual regulation text:
the concept of ‘illegal content’ should broadly reflect the existing rules in the offline environment. In particular, the concept of ‘illegal content’ should be defined broadly to cover information relating to illegal content, products, services and activities. In particular, that concept should be understood to refer to information, irrespective of its form, that under the applicable law is either itself illegal, such as illegal hate speech or terrorist content and unlawful discriminatory content, or that the applicable rules render illegal in view of the fact that it relates to illegal activities. Illustrative examples include the sharing of images depicting child sexual abuse, the unlawful non-consensual sharing of private images, online stalking, the sale of non-compliant or counterfeit products, the sale of products or the provision of services in infringement of consumer protection law, the non-authorised use of copyright protected material, the illegal offer of accommodation services or the illegal sale of live animals. In contrast, an eyewitness video of a potential crime should not be considered to constitute illegal content, merely because it depicts an illegal act, where recording or disseminating such a video to the public is not illegal under national or Union law. In this regard, it is immaterial whether the illegality of the information or activity results from Union law or from national law that is in compliance with Union law and what the precise nature or subject matter is of the law in question.
So, both.
It’s also not that uncommon of an acronym in web tech, all the first results when searching “PWA” are consistent and it’s a very common way to refer to that technology. The term PWA has made the news in tech channels a few times before (like when Firefox discontinued support for PWA on desktop).
Even if they said “Progressive Web Apps” it would not have been immediatelly clear what that means for anyone who is not familiar with what PWA is. It’s also not the only acronym they use in the article without explaining it (eg. “API”, or “iOS” which is also an acronym on itself), it just so happens that it’s likely not a well known one in this particular lemmy community where the article was posted. The author advertises himself as a writer dedicated to web technologies (PWA and Web Component in particular), so it would be silly if he has to explain what those are on every of his posts.
Yes… honestly, I don’t see this approach being worthwhile…
It’s better to search for full open source alternatives, front end and backend… like Lemmy/kbin for or reddit, peertube/lbry for YouTube, etc.
Same effort as getting &*
and ()
on a US layout (so, modifier key + 7 8 9 0, respectively), the difference is you press AltGr instead of Shift as the modifier. And i’d argue its actually easier to press AltGr with the thumb than shift with the pinky.
I use EURkey, which is basically a superset of the US layout extended to support symbols from several European languages.
it’s even ISO standardized
Not only are there other ones that are also ISO standards when it comes to software layouts, but funny enough, when it comes to physical layouts, US keyboards normally follow an ANSI standard (not an ISO one), whereas many non-US keyboards typically follow a physical key layout known as “ISO Keyboard”, so one could argue those are more of an “ISO” standard.
right ctrl + left shift + 9 will do?
No keyboard layout uses ctrl like that… in fact, I don’t think you ever really need to press more than one modifier in any standard non-US keyboard. Unless you have a very advanced custom layout with fancy extra glyphs… but definitelly not for the typical programming symbols.
ISO keyboards actually have one more key and one more modifier (“AltGr”, which is different from “Alt”) than the ANSI keyboards.
In fact, depending on the symbol it might be easier in some cases. No need to press “shift” or anything for a #
or a +
in a German QWERTZ keyboard, unlike in the US one. Though of course for some other ones (like =
or \
) you might need to press 1 modifier… but never more than 1, so it isn’t any harder than doing a )
or a _
in the US layout.
Developing a crippled port that is limited/restricted by design due to Apple policies would not really help Mozilla’s/Firefox’s reputation anyway. Apple fanbois will complain ether way.
If those fanbois want a Firefox app on Apple systems, it’s Apple the one they should complain to.
They aren’t saying that the email/number is part of the message. What the are saying is that they are able to decrypt the logs in order to identify the senders .
It could be they cross-reference matching some internal ids / tokens / physical addresses of the devices together with all the data the Chinese government already has (or can obtain) …or it could be a bluff… who knows… there’s not enough information, and what we know is probably distorted.
deleted by creator
How can Apple debunk it?
If I told you I know of a way by which I can “hack” the lock of your house to enter it, how can you prove whether I’m lying or not? Specially if I’m not willing to show you how I do it, and I haven’t given you any proof of having actually done it that you can try to dispute.
deleted by creator
git switch
Oh wow, I didn’t know about this one. I guess it’s relatively new?
Is it just a convenience command to try and be more specific (less multi purpose) than git checkout
for switching branches or does it bring any extra benefit? …I’m already quite used to my git co
alias, to the point that it’s almost hardwired to my fingers by now :P
Most of those 90% of vendors are not big enough to pull it off. The ones with the muscle to do it successfully are apparently offered special deals by Google that make it not really worth it for them to spend the effort to try and invest in building their own store. Specially if doing so compromises that deal.
Add to that the technical hurdles of trying to run a store in an OS managed by the competition and with increasingly tight security restrictions for functionality that is considered “system level” (eg. automatic updates on F-droid don’t work unless you root/flash the firmware…), to the point that you need to make your own OS/firmware if you want to be a real alternative with the same level of user friendliness.
Then add the technical hurdles of installing/managing an alternative firmware for several phone models, to the point that it might be easier to become (or partner with) a phone manufacturer.
Then add to that how competitive and ruthless the phone manufacturing market is, with very thin margins, and how reluctant people are to trying something that isn’t already mainstream and doesn’t have the fancy apps from the remaining 10% of successful big companies in the Play Store.
A giant as big as Amazon tried to pull it off at a few of those levels (from running their own installable store on regular Android to making their own devices with their own firmware) and even with all the pull from Amazon it isn’t making much of a dent. And in some of the device categories (like the fire phones) they already gave up.
You mean “confidentiality”, not privacy.
Just the metadata related to whether you personally, traceable to your full name and address, have a Signal account and how much you use it might be considered a privacy breach already, even if the content of the messages is confidential.