aspiring Rustacean, JavaScript jockey, 3D printing addict, use Bluefin Linux, (Apple|Google)-captive, Meta-escapee, parent, husband with a husband, cisgender, he/him

  • 48 Posts
  • 101 Comments
Joined 5 years ago
cake
Cake day: April 6th, 2021

help-circle






  • there’s the lockdown or similar feature at the phone level in Android and iOS

    if you’re in a situation where you don’t want someone to access Bitwarden, then you probably also want to stop them from using your browser with all the cookies and logins it currently has

    so temporarily block all biometric access on your phone in such cases, and merrily enjoy biometric access when you’re physically safe again

    on Android, it’s Power + Volume-Up, then Lockdown



  • oh, sorry, now I understand the question

    yes, devices available in CrowdSupply tend to philosophically align with my values: owner is in charge, no subscriptions, cloud connectivity is not a thing or completely optional, schematics are open, drivers are open, etc

    so they aren’t usually interfered with at a functionality or technological level

    but they’re popularity and availability are subject to interference: we’ve already had multiple governments ban or consider banning the Flipper Zero for various reasons

    and we have various media codec patents and DRM requirements that prevent truly open devices from being able to be used for popular purposes like streaming video content which pretty much guarantees that only industry-approved devices will ever gain wide distribution and popularity

    I don’t think it’s too tin-foil hat to suggest that if a truly open device did gain popularity somehow, that we’d see IP lawsuits or import restrictions or mandatory modifications (e.g. countries attempting to mandate a government-operated surveillance app preinstalled on over smartphone)










  • i am weary of absolute statements, because it’s rare to encounter something that is 100% good or 100% evil (but i won’t rule it out, because that in itself would be an absolute statement, haha)

    i agree with disliking corporate babysitting in general, but i think context matters and i won’t rule out the possibility that specific examples of corporate babysitting might align with my values or (by my own measure) seem to be a net good

    for example, the UK laws requiring ISPs to block pornography except where users have opted-in is a great way for the government to produce a list of people they can blackmail, because use of pornography is considered embarassing and shameful (clarification: i consider this net-harmful babysitting)

    but i consider this gambling lock to be net-positive

    I’m curious to discuss reasons why having to opt-in to commercial gambling is a net positive/negative


  • sorry, I had no idea they’d be weird and gate access to support documentation

    Self service locks

    We’ve introduced a digital self-service gambling lock to support you if you want to take a break or stop gambling on your credit or debit card.

    In a few simple steps, you can lock your card from gambling transactions via either NetBank or the CommBank App.

    As an added support, once a lock is switched on, there’s a 48-hour cooling-off period needed to turn it off.

    and

    How it works

    The CommBank credit card gambling and cash block applies to:

    • Most gambling transactions, such as TAB, online gambling sites and lottery tickets
    • Other transactions we consider to be cash equivalents, such as money transfers or travellers cheques
    • Money withdrawn or transferred by you or an additional cardholder at ATMs, online, or over the counter at any CommBank branch

    If you ask us to apply a block, we’ll stop most cash advances and cash-equivalent transactions, including gambling transactions that come to us for authorisation.



  • jokeyrhyme@lemmy.mltoLinux@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    to help communicate and troubleshoot what is broken here, we need to think of Wayland as a protocol just like HTTP is a protocol

    saying “Wayland broke X” is like saying “HTTP broke X”, which is possible but not likely to be what you’re actually trying to say

    rather, we need to be talking about the implementation(s) of the protocol, not the protocol itself

    e.g. “HTTP broke X” -> “Google Chrome broke X”

    e.g. “Wayland broke X” -> “GNOME broke X”