Personally I’d make an exception to my moral stance that work as punishment is slavery, and would prefer to keep him around forcing him to work 70 hours a week, in addition to doing all the other chores required so that he can live - in prison - for the rest of his life.
Maybe we’ll make it 84 hours a week just for good measure, can’t be giving him a day off.
Seems more poetic
I completely agree, well put
I’m not from the US, but it would seem to me that public cameras should only be accessible for legitimate purposes.
Police should need to request footage, but similarly, you shouldn’t be able to just request any footage willy nilly, because of stalking.
Seems that it should be tightly regulated and require multiple people to gain access, and be documented who was given access.
Overall your comment seems like a great suggestion to me. If footage “goes missing”, they had better have way more evidence to back up their charges.
If it makes you feel better, this may be a mistranslation from German where saying “eine Software” is appropriate.
Because of using Shelter, this will make my phone practically unusable.
This is fucking ridiculous
Yeah I’m the same (not really into that type of posting).
I basically want what Facebook once was, but with e2ee. Something like: you make a post, only people you’ve added can see it. They can comment, and if they choose, your friends can see that comment also.
Something to prevent mass scraping and data collection, while retaining the ‘keeping up with old aquitances’ vibe old Facebook used to have.
I really wish we had an end-to-end encrypted option where posts are only shared and accessible to people you’ve added. Some of us don’t wish to post our personal photos to everyone on the internet.
Either LLM or quality trolling
We really need some consumer protections around emails.
Imagine if your landlord could just intercept your mail on the same way.
It’s part of our identities.
We’re living in the Wild-West of the internet
The US lacks even the most basic consumer protections it seems.
In Australia, companies still try to give you the run around, but I am extremely confident this wouldn’t fly here. Even though I’m not a lawyer.
If you literally can’t get a hold of them, they’re breaking Australian Consumer Law, that’s a slam dunk to charge back the card and dare them to take you to your state’s relevant tribunal that hears cases like this. It costs either like $70 to file, you can represent yourself easily, and if you’re low-income, it’s literally free.
They don’t want to waste money on fighting you. If you’re confident you’re clearly in the right, it’s very easy to get a company to back down.
This is a great time to remind everyone to take photos before and after getting a rental car, because otherwise it’s your word against them.
It’s SO funny how apparently for almost 20 years we (as in the west outside the USA) decided that using Chinese cloud platforms or networking hardware was dangerous and to be avoided, but private US companies? Nothing to see here!
Silver lining of the orange man is that maybe countries will wake up and smell the digital sovereignty that we sorely lack.
Friendship ended with Firefox. Waterfox is my new best friend ❤️
You are underestimating how many people will give up at the slightest inconvenience.
I can tell you, when vigorously enforced, you can get the vast majority of a population to play within your walled garden (China, as an example).
Sweden however, yeah, unless they wanna go full internet firewall, not sure exactly how they plan on enforcing this.
It’s almost like this not-for-profit, for-profit subsidiary thing is a cancer (or at least, my selection bias of late thinks so).
Can someone ELI5 why a foundation can’t develop these products directly, with a for-profit subsidiary? Is there something forbidden about rasing revenue for a not-for-profit via product sales? Would this even fix anything?
The implicit song here goes hard