Asking someone to add an additional free messaging app is maybe a 2 out of 10 on the effort scale, where 1 is “hand me that thing that’s next to you” and 10 is “give me one of your kidneys”.
You shouldn’t feel bad about asking anyone who claims to care about you for such a small favor even if it didn’t benefit them, but as others have already mentioned, it does.
When the old one is no longer suitable for use as a primary phone:
The original comment said he “lead the creation of Firefox”, which is usually credited to Blake Ross and Dave Hyatt. I have no doubt he provided support, but that’s not the same thing.
JWZ was involved in getting Netscape released as open source, and in starting the Mozilla foundation. He left before Firefox.
The EU took 500€ notes out of circulation a few years ago because they prefer large transactions to be done by methods that are easier for the government to monitor. I imagine the US government feels the same way.
Part of it is a cultural difference. There’s a formal training and apprenticeship program in Switzerland to become a waiter. The USA relies more on informal on-the-job training than formal education in many fields. In a large, professional police department, it’s often the case that a new hire will be assigned a field training officer for a while; that’s likely to be longer for someone without experience.
The higher level of violence isn’t just lack of training. Some of it is cultural, based on an “us vs. them” mentality. Some of it is based on actual dangers; people in Switzerland pretty much never respond to a traffic stop by shooting at the police, but that’s not a rare occurrence in the USA.
To be fair to Brian Acton, afterward, he did co-found the Signal foundation and give it a hundred million dollar zero-interest loan.
Because of not having enough time and money to maintain the app, like the implementation of encryption and new features, founders Jan Koum and Brian Acton accepted the deal and sold the app for $19 billion to Mark Zuckerberg.
I imagine I’d also find that I don’t have enough time and money to maintain something if someone offered me $19 billion for it.
No. Arbitration can save all parties time and money in many types of disputes. It’s often reasonable for a negotiated contract between near-peer parties to contain an arbitration clause.
What should be illegal is arbitration clauses in non-negotiable terms of service.
I was expected to post three tweets, two Instagram posts, and two TikToks per day. I was also expected to plan, film, edit, and post two Floatplane exclusives per week. This included wrangling people to be in them when they were also all struggling to get their work done.
[edited for formatting]
This sounds like a normal workload for a full-time social media manager. The article doesn’t provide any details about the sexual harassment allegation.
If someone break somebody’s leg, and a third party then makes a news coverage where they claim that someone has killed somebody. Would you still say that this is strongly worded?
The problem here is that the word kill has a precise, unambiguous definition. If I injured someone and they’re still alive, I definitely did not kill them. Raid does not have such a precise definition; most neutral journalists would only describe the execution of a search warrant that way if it was more forceful than average, but there isn’t a bright line.
The special rapporteurs is an independent human rights experts appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council…
I think what you’re trying to say is that appointing a special rapporteur is one of the mildest actions that might reasonably be described as “the U.N. has launched an investigation”. True but mild is not “completely false”.
The “typically reserved for dictatorships and banana republics” is closer to false. Special rapporteurs assigned to specific countries are typically assigned to countries fitting that description, but Kahn’s mandate was for the theme of freedom of expression rather than a specific country. She was the first to visit Germany under that mandate.
I feel like this analysis is an opinion piece as much as it is a fact check. I would probably agree with most of it as an opinion piece; several of the claims checked use charged language and imply the incidents were more serious than they really were, but to present them as “false” or “debunked” is similarly hyperbolic.
I found news coverage from other sources [www.focus.de] that paints a similar picture, but was unable to independently verify R. Zitelmann’s claims.
The focus.de article is by Zitelmann himself, and includes the meme in question. It’s obviously a comparison of Putin to Hitler and I think any reasonable viewer would conclude that both are portrayed unfavorably. If that’s really what triggered a letter from the police, it’s cause for concern about freedom of expression in Germany.
They claim that the person who called Robert Habeck [de.wikipedia.org] “Schwachkopf” got his home “raided.” This is false; the supposed raid was actually a search warrant to seize evidence. The accused voluntarily handed over the tablet used in the crime to officers; consequently, further measures were waived, not least for reasons of proportionality. So no actual home search was conducted. [www.justiz.bayern.de]
The word “raid” might be a little strong here, but so is “false” when the police actually did show up and seize his tablet because he called a politician an idiot on social media. A source of tension here might be that insulting people is a crime in Germany while it’s unambiguously protected free expression in the USA. The average Lemmy user has probably called the president of the United States an idiot at least once this week.
The surge in cases is so vast that the U.N. has launched an investigation into free speech violations in Germany,
…
This is completely false. […] What is true, but wasn’t mentioned in the episode, is that the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression, Ms. Irene Khan, undertook an official country visit to Germany
So it’s not completely false, just worded more strongly than you think is fair.
If the government is mad enough at you, they might go to court to find out. The government seems to be pretty mad at the people protesting “cop city”.
The headline is misleading. They’re not prosecuting him for using GrapheneOS; they’re prosecuting him for using a duress code to erase data when they wanted to search it.
That’s also bad, but it’s a different set of facts. If he had simply refused to provide access, they would have seized his phone, but wouldn’t have this particular creative charge to prosecute.
People in a wide variety of circumstances report positive experiences with psychedelics.
I think someone in a bad situation they can’t improve through their own effort might feel better numbing their experience with drugs. The trouble with that is people aren’t always good at judging whether there’s anything they can do about their bad situation.
They used a procedural trick which only had to pass by a majority of those present to create a situation where it would need an absolute majority to fail in the next vote.
This happened as many MEPs have already left for their summer break and were therefore absent and unable to vote. It appears that Parliament President Roberta Metsola engineered this, but I haven’t looked in to it in detail.
It is exactly fundamental attribution error, with a bit of motivated reasoning.
It’s an easy, comforting answer.
“That person’s life sucks because they do drugs” doesn’t raise any uncomfortable questions, and it makes avoiding a similar situation seem easy. “That person is using drugs because their life sucks” leads us to ask why their life sucks and whether the same thing could happen to us.
Additionally, run an ad/tracker blocker so you don’t leak data to anyone else.
Signal, and (probably) Whatsapp have end-to-end encryption. It’s better to feed less information into mass surveillance systems when you can.