freedomPusher

joined 4 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

I would also like to see Belgium take action against its own political parties who allow Cloudflare to block some demographics of voters from seeing election info. These political parties are running exclusive websites:

  • PS/Vooruit (Socialist / Parti Socialiste [fr/nl])
  • Défi (previously part of the MR, now more at the center [fr])
  • CD & V (center / Christen Democratisch en Vlaams [nl])
  • Groen (Green Party [nl])
  • Open VLD (liberal [nl])
[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

Protonmail failed to satisfy F-Droid’s inclusion criteria because it requires gms (playstore framework) and because it uses Firebase messaging.

Since I’ve disabled gms in my device I’m not sure how Protonmail would work for me. Someone tells me I might simply lose push notifications capability. But I am confused because Snikket pushes notifications just fine on my device.

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

it’s worth noting that protonmail has an onion and their clearnet server also accepts tor connections. So users can control the leakage of their IP... but only if they’re willing to solve countless CAPTCHAs.

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I’m on the edge of quitting protonmail. The issues:

  • #CAPTCHA hell. At least for Tor users.
  • no app in f-droid
  • API shenanigans and/or CAPTCHA breaks hydroxide (the foss bridge)
  • protonvpn: you can no longer fetch all the configs in one download. You have to click “download” >120 times now to get all the configs
  • account locks if you do not login frequently enough (i think every 6 months)
  • if you supply your login creds but get a CAPTCHA and say fuck this, and walk, it does not count as a full login needed to reset the expiration clock
  • the CAPTCHAs are graphical which forces you to enable images in your browser; but when you do that you get images that junk up your screen and waste bandwidth
  • no public keyring. Hushmail was better in this regard. An advanced user could upload their PGP public key to Hushtools and then encryption just worked for hushmail users contacting that person. After Hushmail started charging, I would tell the normies who need comms w/me to get a gratis Protonmail account. But then I have to send them my public key and they have to figure out how to attach it to my profile in their phonebook. It’s a show-stopper in many situations.
[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Security (and budget) vs. Convenience

Multiple CAPTCHAs and broken CAPTCHAs do not benefit any one of those factors.

You could use your clearnet browser and IP, and gotten through easily.

If the inherent disclosure were reasonable, that would be relevant. But it’s not reasonable to expect testers to identify themselves as a precondition to reporting a bug.

ezpz.

lol. Not what you described, which takes time and money and requires unnecessary disclosure.

It should be ezpz. Testers are contributors. Bug reports require effort from volunteers who make a charitable investment into the QA of software in the commons. Of course it should be effortless to submit bug reports. This community exists to make bug submission as trivially easy as it should be. When a project raises the bar of effort with CAPTCHAs and various hurdles, it discourage reports and cheats the public out of QA contributions.

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

They banned e-scooters in Paris? I’ve not heard that. Was it just the rentals or all e-scooters?

The article I referenced said Paris is banning noisy scooters, which would be motor scooters.

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

The related fun fact to that would be that high-pitched sounds are more annoying and perceived to be louder than low frequency sounds with the same db.

I’m sure my sleep is more disrupted living in a city with an occasional 2-stroke engine screaming by than it would be if I lived next to a highway with that relatively constant and relatively distant ambient tire noise.

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

The scooters they mention in the article are the e-scooters you ride standing up in the bike lane.

No they are not. That makes no sense. Stand-up e-scooters are relatively quiet. Quotes from the article (emphasis added):

“worst of all, the high-pitched wail of motor scooters that speed by every few seconds.”

“Motorcycles and scooters — often with their exhaust systems illegally modified to boost noise and power”

“The noise can be ear-splitting,”

Obviously you would not describe a stand-up scooter as ear-splitting or capable of waking someone up. They’re talking about gas small gas combustion engines, most of which are the worst variety on scooters: 2-stroke.

Or if you meant the OP’s article is talking about e-scooters, that article actually covered both:

“Weight rates are usually over 10 times more favourable for the average motorbike or scooter and, of course, even better for lighter vehicles such as electric bicycles or kick-scooters.”

My reaction was to the idea that motor scooters are more favorable by a factor of 10 due to the weight -- which is true, but my criteria is more complex than just ecocide-avoidance… I want my sleep too!

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

That doesn’t work. Making cycling more convenient is only noticed by cyclists. Car drivers see the inconvenience of pedaling. To them it’s harder work to move slower. You can’t offset that in any material way that’s noticed by car drivers from the comfort of their loungy cars as extensions of their living room.

This is why I did not transition from car to bicycle. I needed a mass transit middle step. Mass transit includes the notable convenience of being chauffeured around, not having to look for parking, maintenance free. Then after getting accustomed to waiting for the tram and being locked to the public transport schedule, cycling becomes a viable upgrade from public transport (no waiting and more autonomy).

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

I don’t think whatever article I read about it covered that.

In principle, you should theoretically be able to register for tracking and then have a QR code attached to the front of your bike / shirt which would enter you into the lottery.

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think the top purpose is safety and from there it’s an attempt at optimization. Or perhaps those priorities are flipped. But if you consider Europe which largely favors traffic circles over lights, that’s probably the optimum for keeping cars moving. If I were a selfish car driver in the US, I would want probably ~70% of the traffic lights at all the low-flow intersections to be replaced with traffic circles.

I suppose it won’t be long before this discussion becomes moot. People on their tablets in self-driving cars won’t care whether the car is moving or not.

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

Ah right.. that too. I forgot about that shit. I think California banned gift cards that lose value. So the plaintiff would have to buy the gift card from California. But then it would need to be free shipping. So the more we discuss this, the harder the state’s case gets.

 

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/8702045

(⚠ Enshitification warning: The linked article has a cookie wall; just click “reject” and the article appears)

Google is ending the public access to the cache of sites it indexes. AFAICT, these are the consequences:

  • People getting different treatment due to their geographic location will lose the cache they used as a remedy for access inclusion.
  • People getting different treatment due to having a defensive browser will lose access.
  • The 12ft.io service which serves those who suffer access inequality will be rendered useless.
  • Google will continue to include paywalls in search results, but now consumers of Google search results will be led to a dead-end.
  • The #InternetArchive #WaybackMachine will take on the full burden of global archival.
  • Consumers will lose a very useful tool for circumventing web enshitification.

Websites treat the Google crawler like a 1st class citizen. Paywalls give Google unpaid junk-free access. Then Google search results direct people to a website that treats humans differently (worse). So Google users are led to sites they cannot access. The heart of the problem is access inequality. Google effectively serves to refer people to sites that are not publicly accessible.

I do not want to see search results I cannot access. Google cache was the equalizer that neutralizes that problem. Now that problem is back in our face.

(cross-posting to privacy forums because cache access enables privacy seekers to reach content that otherwise requires them to step outside of Tor)

1
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz to c/netneutrality@sopuli.xyz
 

(⚠ Enshitification warning: The linked article has a cookie wall; just click “reject” and the article appears)

Google is ending the public access to the cache of sites it indexes. AFAICT, these are the consequences:

  • People getting different treatment due to their geographic location will lose the cache they used as a remedy for access inclusion.
  • People getting different treatment due to having a defensive browser will lose access.
  • The 12ft.io service which serves those who suffer access inequality will be rendered useless.
  • Google will continue to include paywalls in search results, but now consumers of Google search results will be led to a dead-end.
  • The #InternetArchive #WaybackMachine will take on the full burden of global archival.
  • Consumers will lose a very useful tool for circumventing web enshitification.

Websites treat the Google crawler like a 1st class citizen. Paywalls give Google unpaid junk-free access. Then Google search results direct people to a website that treats humans differently (worse). So Google users are led to sites they cannot access. The heart of the problem is access inequality. Google effectively serves to refer people to sites that are not publicly accessible.

I do not want to see search results I cannot access. Google cache was the equalizer that neutralizes that problem. Now that problem is back in our face.

 

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/8557194

This is a FOSS tool that enables people to check a website for #GDPR compliance.

 

This is a FOSS tool that enables people to check a website for #GDPR compliance.

 

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/8481789

#poll

 

#poll

 

Every 4 years the Commission is willing to hear from individuals as to whether the GDPR is working. It’s obviously not working one bit for those of us who actually attempt to exercise our #GDPR rights.

That link goes to a PDF which contains a link to another PDF which is a questionaire that can be emailed to the Commission. The email address they give is not on a Google or MS server, thus apparently usable.

Note that the questionaire mentions a deadline of 18 November 2023, but that was for feedback from select groups. The deadline for the general public is 8 Feb.

 

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/7625705

According to the linked article, 72 studies suggest that wi-fi radiation harms/kills #bees -- and by some claims is a threat to their continued existence. I suppose if extinction were really a likely risk there would be widespread outrage and bee conservationists taking actions. It seems there is a lack of chatter about this. This thread also somewhat implies disinterest in even having wi-fi alternatives.

In any case, does anyone think this is a battle worth fighting? Some possible off-the-cuff actions that come to mind:

  • ban the sale of wi-fi devices bigger than a phone in Europe¹ if they do not also comply with these conditions:
    • include an ethernet port as well. So e.g. macbooks would either have to bring back the ethernet port or nix wi-fi (and obviously Apple wouldn’t nix Wi-Fi).
    • have a physical wi-fi toggle switch on the chassis (like Thinkpads have)
  • force public libraries with Wi-Fi to give an ethernet port option so library users at least have the option of turning off their own wi-fi emissions.
  • ban the sale of Wi-Fi APs that do not have:
    • a configurable variable power setting that is easily tunable by the user; maybe even require a knob or slider on the chassis.
    • bluetooth that is internet-capable
  • force phones that include wi-fi to also include bluetooth as well as the programming to use bluetooth for internet. Bluetooth routers have existed for over a decade but they are quite rare.. cannot be found in a common electronics shop.

Regarding bluetooth, it is much slower than wi-fi, lower range, and probably harder to secure. But nonetheless people should have this option for situations where they don’t need wi-fi capability. E.g. when a phone is just sitting idle it could turn off wi-fi and listen over bluetooth for notifications.

I suspect the 1st part of this quote from the article explains the lack of concern:

“The subject is uncomfortable for many of us because it interferes with our daily habits and there are powerful economic interests behind mobile communication technology.”

  1. I say /Europe/ because it’s perhaps the only place where enough people would be concerned and where you also have the greatest chance of passing pro-humanity legislation (no “Citizens United” that human needs have to compete with).
 

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/7625705

According to the linked article, 72 studies suggest that wi-fi radiation harms/kills #bees -- and by some claims is a threat to their continued existence. I suppose if extinction were really a likely risk there would be widespread outrage and bee conservationists taking actions. It seems there is a lack of chatter about this. This thread also somewhat implies disinterest in even having wi-fi alternatives.

In any case, does anyone think this is a battle worth fighting? Some possible off-the-cuff actions that come to mind:

  • ban the sale of wi-fi devices bigger than a phone in Europe¹ if they do not also comply with these conditions:
    • include an ethernet port as well. So e.g. macbooks would either have to bring back the ethernet port or nix wi-fi (and obviously Apple wouldn’t nix Wi-Fi).
    • have a physical wi-fi toggle switch on the chassis (like Thinkpads have)
  • force public libraries with Wi-Fi to give an ethernet port option so library users at least have the option of turning off their own wi-fi emissions.
  • ban the sale of Wi-Fi APs that do not have:
    • a configurable variable power setting that is easily tunable by the user; maybe even require a knob or slider on the chassis.
    • bluetooth that is internet-capable
  • force phones that include wi-fi to also include bluetooth as well as the programming to use bluetooth for internet. Bluetooth routers have existed for over a decade but they are quite rare.. cannot be found in a common electronics shop.

Regarding bluetooth, it is much slower than wi-fi, lower range, and probably harder to secure. But nonetheless people should have this option for situations where they don’t need wi-fi capability. E.g. when a phone is just sitting idle it could turn off wi-fi and listen over bluetooth for notifications.

I suspect the 1st part of this quote from the article explains the lack of concern:

“The subject is uncomfortable for many of us because it interferes with our daily habits and there are powerful economic interests behind mobile communication technology.”

  1. I say /Europe/ because it’s perhaps the only place where enough people would be concerned and where you also have the greatest chance of passing pro-humanity legislation (no “Citizens United” that human needs have to compete with).
 

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/7625705

According to the linked article, 72 studies suggest that wi-fi radiation harms/kills #bees -- and by some claims is a threat to their continued existence. I suppose if extinction were really a likely risk there would be widespread outrage and bee conservationists taking actions. It seems there is a lack of chatter about this. This thread also somewhat implies disinterest in even having wi-fi alternatives.

In any case, does anyone think this is a battle worth fighting? Some possible off-the-cuff actions that come to mind:

  • ban the sale of wi-fi devices bigger than a phone in Europe¹ if they do not also comply with these conditions:
    • include an ethernet port as well. So e.g. macbooks would either have to bring back the ethernet port or nix wi-fi (and obviously Apple wouldn’t nix Wi-Fi).
    • have a physical wi-fi toggle switch on the chassis (like Thinkpads have)
  • force public libraries with Wi-Fi to give an ethernet port option so library users at least have the option of turning off their own wi-fi emissions.
  • ban the sale of Wi-Fi APs that do not have:
    • a configurable variable power setting that is easily tunable by the user; maybe even require a knob or slider on the chassis.
    • bluetooth that is internet-capable
  • force phones that include wi-fi to also include bluetooth as well as the programming to use bluetooth for internet. Bluetooth routers have existed for over a decade but they are quite rare.. cannot be found in a common electronics shop.

Regarding bluetooth, it is much slower than wi-fi, lower range, and probably harder to secure. But nonetheless people should have this option for situations where they don’t need wi-fi capability. E.g. when a phone is just sitting idle it could turn off wi-fi and listen over bluetooth for notifications.

I suspect the 1st part of this quote from the article explains the lack of concern:

“The subject is uncomfortable for many of us because it interferes with our daily habits and there are powerful economic interests behind mobile communication technology.”

  1. I say /Europe/ because it’s perhaps the only place where enough people would be concerned and where you also have the greatest chance of passing pro-humanity legislation (no “Citizens United” that human needs have to compete with).
 

According to the linked article, 72 studies suggest that wi-fi radiation harms/kills #bees -- and by some claims is a threat to their continued existence. I suppose if extinction were really a likely risk there would be widespread outrage and bee conservationists taking actions. It seems there is a lack of chatter about this. This thread also somewhat implies disinterest in even having wi-fi alternatives.

In any case, does anyone think this is a battle worth fighting? Some possible off-the-cuff actions that come to mind:

  • ban the sale of wi-fi devices bigger than a phone in Europe¹ if they do not also comply with these conditions:
    • include an ethernet port as well. So e.g. macbooks would either have to bring back the ethernet port or nix wi-fi (and obviously Apple wouldn’t nix Wi-Fi).
    • have a physical wi-fi toggle switch on the chassis (like Thinkpads have)
  • force public libraries with Wi-Fi to give an ethernet port option so library users at least have the option of turning off their own wi-fi emissions.
  • ban the sale of Wi-Fi APs that do not have:
    • a configurable variable power setting that is easily tunable by the user; maybe even require a knob or slider on the chassis.
    • bluetooth that is internet-capable
  • force phones that include wi-fi to also include bluetooth as well as the programming to use bluetooth for internet. Bluetooth routers have existed for over a decade but they are quite rare.. cannot be found in a common electronics shop.

Regarding bluetooth, it is much slower than wi-fi, lower range, and probably harder to secure. But nonetheless people should have this option for situations where they don’t need wi-fi capability. E.g. when a phone is just sitting idle it could turn off wi-fi and listen over bluetooth for notifications.

I suspect the 1st part of this quote from the article explains the lack of concern:

“The subject is uncomfortable for many of us because it interferes with our daily habits and there are powerful economic interests behind mobile communication technology.”

  1. I say /Europe/ because it’s perhaps the only place where enough people would be concerned and where you also have the greatest chance of passing pro-humanity legislation (no “Citizens United” that human needs have to compete with).
view more: ‹ prev next ›