LibreMonk

joined 1 year ago
[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone 5 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

No, not anymore. They became app exclusive. Customers must become an Apple or Google patron, or just use the bank card. They also closed their shop doors and terminated their phone number. If you call them on their unpublished phone number, they insist: “email us” and they refuse to give any service over the phone. And their email goes through gmail (and no PGP key given). Paper letters are ignored. They also refuse manual transfers. The app is the sole means for transfers.

[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

The EU has that covered as REGULATION (EU) No 260/2012 imposes 2FA.

But for me personally, I do not trust closed-source apps from surveillance advertisers running on a Google or Apple proprietary platform, no matter how well they do the 2FA. Even if the endpoint were impenetrable, I do not trust the bank itself not to snoop -- in part because I do not trust the GDPR, which is scantly enforced and regularly disregarded to a laughable extent. And from the ecocide PoV, I refuse to throw away good hardware and support designed obsolescence. They can pry my old phone from my cold dead hands.

[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Thanks for the feedback. A couple other people also say they have no problem.

I am trapped on a 3-year old version. I could upgrade from 4.0.7 to 4.0.9, but that’s as far as I can go because 4.1.9 abandons anyone running AOS older than 6.0. So I wonder if they recently changed the map server in a way that breaks old versions.

I am also on Tor. But also tried a VPN. I doubt they would block Tor and VPNs and then also introduce blocks on both at the same time. Thought I should mention it in the remote off chance that it matters.

[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

you can’t just scream legal tender and throw physical money at your creditor¹.

IIRC in the US it’s written simply that if you leave legal tender in the creditor’s possession, your debt is reduced by that amount regardless of what they do with it. But of course gathering evidence in that case can be dicey.

If I remember rightly you need to lodge it with the courts and then it basically prevents you from being sued as the money is there to pick up.

There was a guy in Germany who fought the forced use of electronic payment for radio licensing fees that way. He escrowed it in a blocked account so that the gov could not claim he was just looking to evade the fees. It seems like a good approach.

[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

You’re probably right. But certainly I have seen laws that push back in situations where the party with the greatest amount of power and privilige subjects the other party to various factors outside of their control, where the law counters that to mitigate unfairness.

The GDPR exhibits this with a “fairness” clause, which the EDPB reflects on as follows:

EDPB interpretation of fairness clause

  • Non-exploitation – The controller should not exploit the needs or vulnerabilities of data subjects.
  • Power balance – Power balance should be a key objective of the controller-data subject relationship. Power imbalances should be avoided. When this is not possible, they should be recognised and accounted for with suitable countermeasures.
  • No risk transfer – Controllers should not transfer the risks of the enterprise to the data subjects.
  • Respect rights – The controller must respect the fundamental rights of data subjects and implement appropriate measures and safeguards and not impinge on those rights unless expressly justified by law.
  • Ethical – The controller should see the processing’s wider impact on individuals’ rights and dignity.

None of that applies to my non-GDPR situation, but just an example of law that tries the shift burden of risks back onto the party with the most power. Labor law often has rules to protect workers from becoming subject to risks and factors outside of their control. In my case I need to look more at credit and debt laws, where the creditors tend to have disproportionate power. The UK’s legal tender law is one such tool to relieve debtors from the disempowerment of forced banking (which is weak where I am but there may be another mechanism).

took an action, namely leaving the country, of your own free will

It’s perhaps worth noting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights art.13:

  1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State.
  2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

That does not necessarily contradict anything you said, but I think it is a bit harsh for a creditor to make debtors choose between their human rights and satisfying their contractual obligations.

[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

The post was composed with the understanding that different countries have different laws. It is not an attempt to practice UK law outside of the UK. It’s to get a general grasp on core legal theories and common practices and concepts.

For example, I learnt basics of contract law from Nolo. Nolo gives a good basic understanding of legal concepts and norms. Of course Nolo is not an all encompassing reference and does not cover variation from one jurisdiction to the next in detail. But I find that what I have learned from Nolo is very similar concepts span many different jurisdictions. You can imagine that if a law school were to only teach legal concepts that apply specifically in the location of the school, it would be a school of low standards, where lawyers could not easily adapt to other jurisdictions.

I don’t even know if the legal scenario at hand has a wild variation across jurisdictions. Some situations have more variation than others. I’m in the very early stages of trying to get a grasp on what question to ask. I don’t even speak the language of the laws that apply to me, so without even knowing the common concepts for the situation, searching for the relevant statutes is quite an undertaking. If there were some kind of latin jargon to describe the situation of being bound by the action of non-contracting actors, even that would help in finding my way to the precise statutes (or case law) that I need.

Talk to a lawyer, not us.

I qualify for a free lawyer since I have no income. But the agency that allocates pro bono lawyers has very narrow verification requirements (in short, I must have a certificate that proves I am in in the unemployment system). So because I am not in that system, I fall through the cracks. Which means I have to work pro se in this case.

[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone 2 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (3 children)

I suspected that. It is interesting to know indeed. That is also the case in the US, where contracts cannot trump legal tender law.

But I believe I’m in a cash-unfriendly country where legal tender does not distinguish debts from points of sale and contracts trump law in this case, so I am still mainly interested in knowing the very general legal theories in contract law for situations where someone is bound by the actions of those not a party to the contract.

Another example: what if a contract required someone to obtain and maintain a mobile phone service, then later in the contract SIM registration is implemented and the obligated party cannot get service because their ID card is rejected or they don’t meet whatever KYC requirements? Hypothetical, but I am increasingly finding myself in situations where a supplier of some kind forces me to be served in some way by some other service.

Really seems off that I can be contractually obligated in a way that requires action by others. Fair enough if I have to make an effort to get served by a 3rd party, but when the effort fails I’m very annoyed that I might be accountable for the consequences.

 

cross-posted from: https://linkage.ds8.zone/post/341870

I signed an agreement with a creditor that obligates me to pay them using a bank inside the country. This was fine initially but then I moved out of the country and the acct was closed. Other banks will not open an account for me and the creditor refuses cash. So the creditor is treating me like a non-payer to a quite harsh extent.

I have over-simplified here but I just want to know very generally what the common practices are around the world for contract law situations where someone without much bargaining power signs a contract that obligates them to do something that’s only achievable if other 3rd-parties agree to serve them, and then those other 3rd-parties later refuse.

BTW, I am not interested in advice on situational hacks and angles like “find a friend to pay for you”. I want to know how courts treat the situation when all options have failed. Are people typically held accountable for agreeing to something which relied on actions of others?

(the situation is not in the US but I am still interested in answers as to how these kinds of situations are dealt with in the US; of course legal tender is a right the US gives to debtors, but I’m looking for more general legal concepts)

 

I signed an agreement with a creditor that obligates me to pay them using a bank inside the country. This was fine initially but then I moved out of the country and the acct was closed. Other banks will not open an account for me and the creditor refuses cash. So the creditor is treating me like a non-payer to a quite harsh extent.

I have over-simplified here but I just want to know very generally what the common practices are around the world for contract law situations where someone without much bargaining power signs a contract that obligates them to do something that’s only achievable if other 3rd-parties agree to serve them, and then those other 3rd-parties later refuse.

BTW, I am not interested in advice on situational hacks and angles like “find a friend to pay for you”. I want to know how courts treat the situation when all options have failed. Are people typically held accountable for agreeing to something which relied on actions of others?

 

TL;DR → The main problem is coming up with a way to reorder an array non-randomly but without introducing bulky code. Like the effect of shuffling a deck of cards in a deterministic cheating way.


Full background:

I would like to generate reference numbers for letters sent via postal mail. An sqlite db is used to track the sequence numbers (but not the reference numbers). This is the bash code I have so far:

typeset -a symbolset=(a b c d e f g h   j k   m n   p q r s t u v w x y z     2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9)
ln_symbolset=${#symbolset[@]}; # 41 is the answer, not 42
itemseq=$(sqlite3 ltr_tracking.db "select max(counter) from $tbl;")
printf '%s\n' "next letter reference number is: $(date +%Y)-${symbolset[$((itemseq / ln_symbolset))]}${symbolset[$((itemseq % ln_symbolset))]}"

An array is defined with alphanumeric symbols, taking care to eliminate symbols that humans struggle to distinguish (e.g. 1l0o). Then integer div and mod operations produce a two character number which is then prefixed with the year. So e.g. 2024-aa. Just two chars gives more numbers than would ever be generated in one calandar year.

This code mostly satisfies the need. But there’s a problem: a recipient who receives two letters can easily realise how many letters were sent in the time span of the two letters they receive. Most numbers will start with “a” “b” or “c”.

I do not need or want a cryptographic level of security which then leads to ungodly 16 byte numbers. Simplicity¹ is far more important than confidentiality. Just a small tweak to stifle the most trivial analysis would be useful.

One temptation is to simply manually mix up the order of chars in the symbolset array, hard-coded. But then that makes the code less readible. So I probably need to create a 2nd array “symbolseq” which arbitrarily unorders the symbolset array. I say arbitrary and not random because the sequence must be deterministic and static from one execution to the next.

An associative array is one idea:

typeset -A symbolset_lookup_table=(
[a]=k
[b]=3
[c]=s
…

I’m just slightly put off by the fact that it’s not readily evident that the RHS values are all used from the same set as the LHS keys exactly once.

I should probably encode the year as well. This would give a two char year:

printf '%s ' "$(((2024/41) % 41))" "$((2024 % 41))" "→ ${symbolset[$(((2024 / 41) % 41))]}" "${symbolset[$((2024 % 41))]}"

output:
8 15 → j s

(edit)
All the calculations must be easily reversible so a ref number can be converted back into a sequence number for DB queries.

¹ simplicity in both the code and in the numbers generated.

[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Your client would make a difference. What you are probably seeing is the mirrored version of !tex@lemmy.sdfeu.org on lemm.ee. You cannot possibly be interacting with a non-existent community. If I post to https://linkage.ds8.zone/c/tex@lemmy.sdfeu.org, then I don’t suppose you would see it on https://lemm.ee/c/tex@lemmy.sdfeu.org.

(edit) just saw your test msg. Well, that’s interesting. Even though !tex@lemmy.sdfeu.org no longer exists, it seems the mirrored versions of it can still collaborate. I’m not sure how that works.

[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If i build a shitty house and it collapses, I own it, I don’t write a manifesto about how it’s all lumber’s fault.

If you sell the house in a high-pressure sales tactic way (“buy in the next 5 min or deal is off the table”) and deny inspection to the buyer before it collapses, that would be as close as this stupid analogy can get to the JS scenario.

As does FOSS C

Nonsense. As you were told, C is not dynamically fetched and spontaneously executed upon visiting a website.

do you install linux from the source tree and build everything yourself? no, you download an .iso, so you are bound to the whims of the OS maintainer,

Nonsense. Have a look at gentoo. You absolutely can build everything from source. You can inspect it and you can also benefit from the inspection of others. Also, look into “reproduceable builds”.

Literally every JS package I’ve ever used does this.

Nonsense. The web is unavoidably littered with unpublished JS that’s dynamically fetched every time you visit the page.

 

cross-posted from: https://linkage.ds8.zone/post/273391

Can anyone recommend a download manager for AOS 5 that can accept as input a list of URLs? This is what I’ve tried:

  • GigaGet (must hand-type each URL manually)
  • Download Navi (must hand-type each URL manually)
  • Aria2App (strangely, it apparently needs a server and cannot simply fetch files directly)

#askFedi

 

Can anyone recommend a download manager for AOS 5 that can accept as input a list of URLs? This is what I’ve tried:

  • GigaGet (must hand-type each URL manually)
  • Download Navi (must hand-type each URL manually)
  • Aria2App (strangely, it apparently needs a server and cannot simply fetch files directly)

/cc @askfedi@a.gup.pe #askFedi

[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

they attribute buggy sites to the company, not the underlying language (rightly so)

Precisely my point. Recall what I wrote about conflict of interest. I’m not talking about a problem of the language syntax and semantics. I’m talking about JavaScript products (in the mathematical sense of a product not in the commercial sense; the code artifacts, iow).

JS runs client side and you can see what scripts are downloaded and running

That does nothing to remedy the conflict of interest. They can also push obfuscated JS but that’s beside the point. The problem is users are not going to review that code even the first time they visit a site, much less every single time due to the nature of dynamically re-fetching the code every single time you visit a page. Even if some OCD nutty user had that level of motivation, they do not benefit from the reviews of others because the code is not being reviewed from a static centralised space. Your idea that software freedom will somehow escape the conflict of interest problem is nonsense. A site admin can do whatever they want to the code to serve themselves and you end up with users running code that is designed to serve someone else.

So open source projects written in C benefit the user, but open source projects written in JS do not?

FOSS C projects hard and fast benefit the user because of the distribution of the code. We do not fetch a dynamically changing version of unreviewable unverified C code every time we visit a website. Distribution of C code is more controlled than that.

FOSS JS depends on how it’s distributed. Someone can write JS in their basement with no public oversight, license it to pass the LibreJS plugin test, and technically it’s FOSS but because of how it’s reviewed and distributed the benefits are diminishing. If the FOSS JS is in a public repo and statically downloadable (e.g. electronmail), then the conflict of interest is removed and the code is static (not fetched on-the-fly upon every execution which escapes a QA process).

Electronmail demonstrates FOSS JS that avoids the conflict of interest problem but that’s exceptional. That’s not how most JS is distributed. Most JS is distributed from a stakeholder, thus presents a conflict of interest.

 

I was thinking about the problem with JavaScript and the misery it brings to people. I think I’ve pinned it down to a conflict of interest.

Software is supposed to serve the user who runs it. That’s the expectation, and rightfully so. It’s not supposed to serve anyone else. Free software is true to this principle, loosely under the FSF “freedom 0” principle.

Non-free software is problematic because the user cannot see the code. The code only has to pretend to serve the user while in reality it serves the real master (the corporation who profits from it).

JavaScript has a similar conflict of interest. It’s distributed by the same entity who operates API services -- a stakeholder. Regardless of whether the JS is free software or not, there is an inherent conflict of interest whereby the JS is produced by a non-user party to the digital transactions. This means the software is not working for the user. It’s only pretending to.

[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I’m not sure what that is. vger.social and voyager.lemmy.ml don’t seem to have anything relevant. But I found !tex_typesetting@lemmy.sdf.org.

 

This is what I found for screen capturing:

There is an adb method that works by running the Java desktop client net.srcz.android.screencast.Main, but there is no way to capture the screen if you’re not near a PC with adb. I got burnt because I needed to capture the window of a broken captive portal, and the browser refreshes the screen when it’s backgrounded and then brought back to focus.. which is a bit fucked up of a behavior.

update


I just found this post which mentions some options that my search missed.

 

I just started using the LaTeX community (!tex@lemmy.sdfeu.org). Sad to see it go.

update


Just noticed it’s back up, but there are no communities. That’s bizarre. So if someone not on lemmy.sdfeu.org were to post to !tex@lemmy.sdfeu.org, I guess it’d still be like a ghost node because the post would have nowhere to go on the hosting node.

[–] LibreMonk@linkage.ds8.zone 1 points 1 year ago

After more investigation, muPDF is a FOSS PDF viewer that does not use Poppler libs. I’m told it renders the standard fonts but not the others.

Acrobat is perhaps the only PDF viewer that displays callouts. And the pdfcomment package has a serious defect that has a callout strike through the page.

So much for PDFs being “portable”.

 

This is the sample code (for LuaTeX or XeTeX):

\documentclass{scrartcl}

\usepackage{pdfcomment}
\usepackage[english]{babel}
%\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{lmodern}
\usepackage{microtype}
\usepackage[svgnames,rgb]{xcolor}
\usepackage[absolute]{textpos}
\usepackage{amssymb,amsmath,array,bm}
\usepackage{courier}
\usepackage{calligra,mathptmx,helvet,concmath}
\usepackage{times}
\usepackage{fontspec} % used to access system fonts like Lucida Fax

\begin{document}

\defineavatar{standard}{height=10mm,width=15cm,type=freetext,color=white,fontsize=20pt,fontcolor=blue}%,voffset=-4.8cm,hoffset=-3.2cm}%

\noindent%
Fonts from the pdfcomment example document:\\[10mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard]{This font is Helvetica (the default)}\\[6mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=LucidaConsole]{This font is LucidaConsole}\\[6mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=Georgia]{This font is Georgia}\\[6mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=PalatinoLinotype]{This font is PalatinoLinotype}\\[6mm]
Fonts considered among the ``14 standard fonts'':\\[10mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=TiRo]{This font is Times-Roman (TiRo)}\\[6mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=Helv]{This font is Helvetica (Helv)}\\[6mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=Cour]{This font is Courier (Cour)}\\[6mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=ZaDb]{This font is ZapfDingbats (ZaDb)}\\[6mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=Symb]{This font is Symbol (Symb)}\\[6mm]
Ad-hoc selection:\\[10mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=lmodern]{This font is Latin Modern}\\[6mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=textcomp]{This font is textcomp}\\[6mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=bogus]{This font is bogus (non-existent yet accepted!)}\\[6mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font={Lucida Fax}]{This font is Lucida Fax from fontspec}\\[6mm]
\pdffreetextcomment[avatar=standard,font=calligra]{This font is Calligra}\\[6mm]

\end{document}

The first question is what can be done to make the fonts render correctly in Poppler-based PDF viewers?

The other question: is Poppler the only game in the FOSS town? Or is there a FOSS alternative?

#askfedi #latex

view more: ‹ prev next ›