Hm, maybe I heard someone who was just confident with their presentation, and I thought it was science. Clearly there are some counterexamples out there.

Yeah, but why were they all taking turns?

What the fuck were they saying?

Why don’t they do it when people are around?

Cats do this, too. Late at night, a buddy of mine happened on a bunch of cats sitting in a circle, taking turns meowing at each other. He froze and watched it for a little while, and after a few meows, they all whipped around to look at him when they became aware of him, and then they all scattered in all directions.

What were they up to? Why did a human nearby scare them and make them stop and run?

Edit: Yes, I know adult cats don’t meow at each other, only at humans. I’m just reporting what was told to me.

Nginx and Lemmy both absolutely log IPs by default. sudo journalctl -u lemmy -f.

I assume that most admins of server big enough that they have to worry about abuse should check IPs to detect ban evasion, although you can get around it reliably by switching instances, and whether they actually do that or not would be a crapshoot, I think.

Yeah, I wasn’t implying anything at all negative. It’s clearly just a part of the joke, I was just sort of gently making it clear before saying “Yes though, it is accurate that the art people often have better parties.”

1. I suspect there is a strong possibility, at least, that she’s not actually passed out drunk and OP is telling a fib. Call it a hunch.
2. Yes the art and design student parties are often quite a bit more adventurous in general, I think

It usually stems from insecurity. People who actually are the boss are perfectly comfortable with someone who knows more than them about some particular area (like for example the life details of their own life).

I read a pretty sad article by a person who was trying to run educational seminars, and was running into an issue where almost everyone from this one particular culture was apparently so caught up in macho-thinking that they were more or less impossible to teach. The teacher would ask a question, and if someone was wrong they would tell them and tell them the right answer, and from that day forward that student would be the enemy. They would glower at the teacher, talk to them after class about how they embarrassed him in front of everyone, never answer questions again. Or maybe they would refuse to accept the answer the teacher was giving, and start arguments about it where they had to be right. Stuff like that. The end conclusion was “I am really trying not to be prejudiced about this, but it really feels like trying to run seminars in this locality is just a waste of time because they are almost universally hostile to the idea of ever learning anything, even from a clearly identified and accepted authority figure.”

I think it stems from the “I have to be the boss” mentality. If someone tells you something, and you learn from them, then they are the master and you are the learner, and to some people that is intolerable no matter how accurate it is, or how trivial the scenario.

There are two types of people: People who are open to receiving new information about the world, including information about people they are interacting with. Their reaction is something along the lines of, “Oh, that’s cool, I didn’t know that. I’m going to go with the assumption that you’re not just lying to my face or just wrong about everything, or something along those lines, an assumption I would have arrived at for no reason at all.”

Then there’s the other type of person, who regards new information as an attack, against which a defense must be mustered.

The guy certainly did, who said “Don’t bring anything with a modem and you’re good to go,” ignoring quite a bit of additional advice that the article gives that could really help some people out and explicitly implying that they don’t need to read it as long as they don’t bring their phone.

Maybe it’s not fair for me to ascribe that to all of lemmy.ml just because that one person did it. There are plenty of people in all corners of the internet who are sure they’re instant experts on everything, y’all don’t have a monopoly. What I was actually trying to say was that “being a community of privacy enthuiasts” and a history of communism doesn’t give anyone a pass on ignoring advice from the EFF and instead offering their own 2-second take on it as an expert opinion. I think that’s a foolish habit of thought to get into.

If you had responded with, “Hey, don’t blame this guy on lemmy.ml, we’re concerned with US state power and of course we take seriously what the EFF has to say about this topic” then I probably wouldn’t have been snarky about it. But I do apologize about being snarky about it, I think it was a little un called for.

The EFF might know a thing or two about OPSEC as pertains to activities against US state power. They know more than you do.

You don’t automatically absorb all the knowledge of “communists” and a century of real-world experience simply because you’re on lemmy.ml. Again: EFF knows more than you do, on this topic. If that kind of thing is a confusing concept, you need to get out more, and stop looking at lemmy.ml as conferring a special type of power that the EFF isn’t privy to.

A lot of people are still coordinating their protest activities through Facebook. Recommending signal or matrix is a step up, full stop.

Thank you. I don’t know what I was thinking, posting this (edit: on lemmy.ml anywhere on the internet) where any useful advice will immediately be countered with “no no don’t pay attention to that, I just thought about it for 3 seconds and I’m pretty sure I have a better answer than whatever the people whose whole job and organization is this.” I won’t repeat the mistake.

Edit: You know what, it’s really unfair of me to single out lemmy.ml for this. People who are convinced they don’t need to read the article and are experts already because they figured out not to bring their phone to a protest, and need to share their wisdom in the comments instead of reading the article and learning things, are common in every corner of the internet’s globe I think.

I bought my transit ticket with a credit card, and they picked me up. Can I give them your number, will you be my lawyer now?

I mean, having a big offtopic conversation (like this one is) is something that’s pretty legit for the mods to remove. I do understand why the digression about the-company-that-shall-not-be-named in the original keyboards thread was removed.

For the mod to take an axe to the comments in the second post, where people are trying to figure out even what TCTSNBN was and what its deal was, saying that what the mod knows is all that everyone needs to know, and no one is allowed to say anything else, is I think not really something that can be solved with an explanation in the comments or the sidebar. It’s not a “detail of the rules” thing. It’s a “Do I have enough respect for you to just give an explanation, and trust that people will take it seriously or not according to their own determination? Or do I need to remove anyone with any kind of dissenting judgement and leave only my own judgement, because that’s the one that is correct, and people might be poisoned if they see the incorrect one which is propaganda?” type of thing.

1. Dude, just go somewhere that isn’t lemmy.ml if you don’t like the censorship style of moderation.
2. I would let it go, TBH. I do get it. I felt the same when I first joined with Lemmy and found I couldn’t just say what I wanted to say. I actually tried to make this case to one of the lemmy.ml moderators a few days ago, for exactly this reason. But it sounds like their minds are pretty much made up, and arguing the case isn’t going to accomplish much. I think just find a different place instead of adding dispute to the daily menu.

"At 7am watching the cars on the bridge

Everybody’s going to work. Well.

Not me. I’m not

Going to work."

-James Moore

There was a mixed ruling at the US Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit as the appeals court affirmed a jury’s finding that Cox was guilty of willful contributory infringement but reversed a verdict on vicarious infringement “because Cox did not profit from its subscribers’ acts of infringement.”

That ruling vacated a $1 billion damages award and ordered a new damages trial. Cox and Sony are both seeking a Supreme Court review. Cox wants to overturn the finding of willful contributory infringement, while Sony wants to reinstate the $1 billion verdict.

Cox has said that letting the piracy ruling stand “would force ISPs to terminate Internet service to households or businesses based on unproven allegations of infringing activity, and put them in a position of having to police their networks.” Cox said that ISPs “have no way of verifying whether a bot-generated notice is accurate” and that even if the notices are accurate, terminating an account would punish every user in a household where only one person may have illegally downloaded copyrighted files.

Record labels urged the court to reinstate the vicarious infringement verdict. “As the District Court explained, the jury had ample evidence that Cox profited from its subscribers’ infringement, including evidence ‘that when deciding whether to terminate a subscriber for repeat infringement, Cox considered the subscriber’s monthly payments,’ and ‘Cox repeatedly declined to terminate infringing subscribers’ Internet service in order to continue collecting their monthly fees,'” the record labels’ petition said.

So, current precedent is that the ISPs do have to terminate, but there’s no penalty if they don’t. Is November recent enough that the ruling has actually had any impact? Did the Supreme Coury decide to take up the case or not yet? How much does it means that the ISPs “have to” terminate users, but there doesn’t seem to be a penalty if they don’t? Is the fact that there was no ruling until recently, confirmation that they were doing it voluntarily for their own reasons before November? Or were they doing it “voluntarily” because they didn’t want to defend lawsuits like this, except Cox which was refusing to do it apparently? I have no sure idea of the answer to any of those questions. That’s why I said “I think.” But, unlike some people on the internet, I don’t just make up some bullshit and then decide that’s what I “think” and go spouting off about it. I’m just relaying my best guess, reasons for it, and being honest about the fact that it’s a guess.

I don’t think that it’s actually true that ISPs are liable if they don’t take down users. I think they go along with it because (1) it’s easier than arguing (2) those users are using a lot of bandwidth and the piracy forms a handy excuse.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2024/11/supreme-court-may-decide-whether-isps-must-terminate-users-accused-of-piracy/

I wouldn’t be so sure. China is at the world’s forefront of automated techniques to be able to spy on and manipulate people through their own devices at massive scale. If they had some semi-workable technology to fingerprint individuals through their typing patterns, in conjunction with fingerprinting the devices they were using through other means, that would make perfect sense to me.

I don’t think it is especially a concern for Deepseek specifically, for reasons discussed elsewhere in the comments. That one particular aspect of the privacy issue is probably being overblown, when there are other adjacent privacy and security concerns that are a lot more pressing. Honestly, that one particular detail isn’t really proven simply because it’s in the privacy policy, and even if they are doing something like that, its inclusion or not in this particular privacy policy or this app isn’t the particularly notable part about it.