cabbage
@cabbage@piefed.social
- Comment on How often do guys have a haircut? 14 hours ago:
Same, except I kinda just cut off a bit here and there as adjustments every now and then. So I never really have a new haircut, it stays somewhat stable.
- Comment on Interesting Intel tech for rendering graphics 2 days ago:
"How do you do, fellow scholars"
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
But at least he's self aware! That places him in an intellectual capacity at least somewhere between a giant panda and a house mouse. Not bad for a troll.
- Comment on [deleted] 2 weeks ago:
respect, kindness and have principles that I apply uniformly
Not actions that he applies uniformly. Obviously you meet people with different actions. But you can remain constant in principles.
Its possible to respect both your mother and your partner, yet only have sex with one of them. Weirdo.
- Comment on The Browser Wasn’t Enough, Google Wants To Control All Your Software 2 weeks ago:
I would be very happy if anyone could explain to me in a simple and coherent way why I, as a normal user who am aware of what I am doing on my device and am not targeted by any group that's out to get me, would need a "hardened malloc", "secure app spawning", "vanadium browser and webview", or a "hardened PDF viewer". The last of these four is the only thing that means anything to me, and it sounds dumb. Yeah, I know PDFs can be dangerous if you open random shit, but come on.
If I run Waydroid it's only to get my banking app (trusted source) and Whatsapp (not a trusted source but not directly malware either) working. I hardly need their hardened PDF reader.
- Comment on The Browser Wasn’t Enough, Google Wants To Control All Your Software 2 weeks ago:
I guess if Google closes down AOSP it would get forked, and the fork would probably be a separate thing from the current Android distributions. So that the landscape would continue to look a bit like today, except that AOSP would be an independent thing.
Then I guess it's possible that Google would seek to make android apps incompatible, gradually making the whole thing kinda pointless. I can't say I'm using Android for the great UX - I'm using it because it supports a few apps I continue to be forced to use. If I can't use them an Android any more I'm switching to Ubuntu Touch or PostmarketOS in a heartbeat.
- Comment on 4chan and Kiwi Farms Sue the UK Over its Age Verification Law 2 weeks ago:
I guess the parts of the fediverse that allows adult content. There's a lot of people on the fediverse dedicated to supporting sex workers and stuff like that. None of these sites or users are in a position to sue the UK though.
- Comment on 4chan and Kiwi Farms Sue the UK Over its Age Verification Law 2 weeks ago:
Now 4chan becomes the face of my resistance to this shit, and people will think it is only being opposed by a bunch of deplorable incels. It delegitimizes the entire opposition - you can't speak out against it any more without being associated with 4chan and whatever the fuck kiwi farm is.
- Comment on Google will block sideloading of unverified Android apps starting next year 2 weeks ago:
Everything takes a long time, but things are happening. If you search for the terms "fine apple EU" or "fine apple EU" in your search engine of choice you'll see there's quite a lot going on.
I have some personal friends who are working with this stuff for the European Commission. It basically takes a long time to build a case against tech giants, and then once the Commission fines them these fines will be appealed in the EU court system, which will take even more years to process.
It's annoying that there's not a magic switch to flick to make Google and Apple comply with EU law, but that's the world we live in. If the EU just banned Google and/or Apple it would probably backlash tremendously, so they have to move a bit slowly. :)
- Comment on Google will block sideloading of unverified Android apps starting next year 2 weeks ago:
You can't make laws for every single possible future reality. We need courts that uphold laws even when billionaires try to dodge them using shady techniques. The problem is that big tech often gets away with murder because they can afford expensive lawyers. Especially in the US laws are essentially meaningless for the rich. This is not so much the case in Europe.
I have heard some positive signals from the European Court of Justice that they are taking the challenge from big tech seriously and that they are going the extra miles to understand these issues. If you're particularly interested, many judges talk about this in the Borderlines podcast series by Berkley law. But it gets really dry really fast haha.
I don't believe in signing authorities. It's not effective - Google can't even keep malware off the play store - and it's an authoritarian move. Hell, most apps in the play store spy on their users, profiling usage to sell to advertisers along with ID codes that makes it possible to combine data between apps and build detailed profiles of individuals. The problem is not apps that are not signed - the problem is the whole economy of apps that work as Google intend them to.
Also, it's a basic question of rights. It's my phone, I bought the hardware, I own it, I install whatever the fuck I want on it.
- Comment on Google will block sideloading of unverified Android apps starting next year 2 weeks ago:
Not unabated. They are stuck trying to find new loopholes to not comply, which are then struck down. It's a cat and mouse game, and they think they can get away with it because they have the most expensive lawyers.
Again, enforcement is the challenge, not the laws themselves.
- Comment on Google will block sideloading of unverified Android apps starting next year 3 weeks ago:
I have no idea as I don't follow apple much, but I am aware that they are constantly trying to find ways to avoid complying with EU law, and that it is often rapidly struck down.
What you're describing here is not a failure of the law, but Apple trying real hard to find creative ways not to comply with it. To me it only shows that they are desperate, and that EU law is in fact getting to them.
If they keep at it it'll eventually end up in court, the case will take a couple of years, and they'll be slammed with a fine and asked to get their shit together.
- Comment on Google will block sideloading of unverified Android apps starting next year 3 weeks ago:
Does the law demand unsigned software?
The answer is no. It's not phrased like that. But it's all about ensuring free competition in digital markets. The sole purpose of Google's move here is to hinder competition in their own digital market, and to keep control over it.
So the law does not have a paragraph stating that "unsigned software must be allowed", but it has a bunch of other paragraphs that can be used to strike down on monopolistic behaviour.
Google are aware of the law, and will try to find a loophole by designing a system that they believe technically complies with it. Then someone will sue them, it will end up in the European court, and the European court will in all likelyhood tell Google to get fucked.
It seems american tech companies think they can get away with anything because that's how it works in the US. We are repeatedly seeing that this is not how it works in Europe: the Court of Justice tends to care deeply about the intention of the law, as well as the perceived consequences of their rulings. And they don't seem to care all that much about American capitalists.
But to answer your question very simply: No, it doesn't. Thankfully that doesn't matter at all.
- Comment on Google will block sideloading of unverified Android apps starting next year 3 weeks ago:
What exactly do you mean?
Sure, nothing is perfect, but EU legislation has generally been quite good, from the GDPR to the DMA.
The challenges are more related to enforcement - rules on the book are worth nothing if we don't force companies to live by them. In this respect we've seen some pretty sloppy behaviour, but also some victories. It's not a one-sided story.
Another challenge is of course to keep passing good laws, and to avoid terrible ones. Chat control needs to be stopped. Stopping it is a matter of convincing national governments it's a bad idea, as well as members of the European Parliament - everyone should be writing their representatives NOW. But that's another issue entirely. :)
- Comment on Google will block sideloading of unverified Android apps starting next year 3 weeks ago:
Google is clearly trying to find a loophole here. Their loophole clearly sucks.
In all likelihood it'll end up in front of the Court of Justice of the European Union. And in all likelihood Google will lose again.
The Court of Justice generally seems unimpressed by American lobbyists, so the strategy of finding a dumb loophole is probably doomed to fail.
- Comment on Google will block sideloading of unverified Android apps starting next year 3 weeks ago:
The EU already forced sideloading to be officially supported on iPhones thanks to the Digital Markets Act, and that law applies to Google as well.
The US will likely apply pressure, just like they are trying to force their death machines to be legalized on European roads. Apple already tried to pressure the union and failed, but the political climate has changed a bit since then, and while EU bureaucrats can be fierce, European leadership tends to be weak as fuck.
But yeah, chances are that this change won't apply to the EU. :)
- Comment on I went to the UK last week. Nothing about my trip was legal. 3 weeks ago:
Of course, I wouldn't expect the UK government to produce information in French. However there is a traditional way of doing things: You fly a yellow flag, and you report to a port of entry upon arrival.
If this is changed without being very publisized, it is really stupid not to at least have a transition period where people can still register their entry into the country after their arrival, until the new rules are well established and the website that is supposed to be serving them is out of beta testing.
If you want to sail from the UK to France, you just raise the appropriate flags, and then you announce your arrival when you get there. Ask in the harbour and they'll let you know where to go. So you wouldn't have to navigate their legal system, you just need to know how to use flags.
That said, I had no problem being in the UK illegally, so no real complaints from my part. It just seems like an attempt at tightening control of the borders that ended up having the exact opposite effect.
- Comment on I went to the UK last week. Nothing about my trip was legal. 3 weeks ago:
Yeah, but it needs to be announced somehow. We all filled in ETAs, because this is something people have heard about. It would make sense to inform of something like this at the end of the ETA registration. Instead, the fact that I had a travel authorization lead me to believe that I was, in fact, authorized to travel to the UK.
- Comment on I went to the UK last week. Nothing about my trip was legal. 3 weeks ago:
Yeah, I suspect I have a neat little collection of views that would be considered extreme by certain layers of English society. Feels weird having to lie about agreeing with UK politics in order to enter the country as a tourist.
- Comment on what are the grievances with the "male loneliness epidemic"? 3 weeks ago:
Yeah, I got what you meant - it's a word that takes on a billion different meanings. I just find it to be important to push back against the strawman whenever I see it, as I'm not gonna let a bunch of dumb kids raised by a social media algorithm ruin feminism for me. Get off my lawn etc.
- Comment on I went to the UK last week. Nothing about my trip was legal. 3 weeks ago:
All good - the UK is a fascinating mix between the best and the worst. I guess that's almost part of the charm at this point.
- Comment on I went to the UK last week. Nothing about my trip was legal. 3 weeks ago:
Yeah, in order to find the site again for the purpose of this post I had to switch search engines as well.
Also doesn't make it easier that a minority of the crew spoke good English. Most are only comfortable in French. I imagine most Brits would struggle if they had to dig up obscure government websites in French that they had no idea even existed.
- Comment on I went to the UK last week. Nothing about my trip was legal. 3 weeks ago:
I'm pretty sure it's because I mention that I support Palestine Action, which although it's not a central point in the post is a pretty hot political potato in the UK at the moment. Fair enough. :)
- Comment on I went to the UK last week. Nothing about my trip was legal. 3 weeks ago:
It's easier to find the website retroactively when you already have it and you know which vocabulary it uses. Use the wrong word and you only get a million articles about illegal immigration.
Furthermore, we had no way of knowing a website like this now existed, as in the past you would sail in and then register. We had no reason to believe anything had changed on that front and therefore no reason to conduct a whole lot of research into it.
If I wanted to enter illegally I would obviously have saved my £20 and not gotten an ETA, as I ended up not needing it anyway.
- Comment on I went to the UK last week. Nothing about my trip was legal. 3 weeks ago:
At least it feels good to be part of a statistic.
- Comment on I went to the UK last week. Nothing about my trip was legal. 3 weeks ago:
When you read guidelines about sailing to the UK anywhere this website is never linked, at least not in any source I could find, as it is too new and nobody seems aware of it yet. The harbour when we arrived were also not immediately aware of it. And to find it again I had to try several different search terms while adding "site:gov.uk" into the search engine. All the search results are just about illegal immigration. I'm not sure exactly how they expect people to gain awareness of it.
If you press the big green button saying "start now" you'll come to the website of the form, which states clearly on top: "Beta This is a new service – your feedback will help us to improve it", which is why I describe it as a beta website. Because it literally is.
- Comment on I went to the UK last week. Nothing about my trip was legal. 3 weeks ago:
Small footnote: I noticed this post got deleted from !casualuk@feddit.uk for not being casual enough (I guess I am extreme), with a suggestion it could be put here instead. As I spent some time writing it and was lucky enough to still have it open in a browser window I figured I'd give it a shot, even though I feel like this community might be for slightly more serious stuff. I hope it's not too out of place :)
- Submitted 3 weeks ago to unitedkingdom@feddit.uk | 31 comments
- Comment on what are the grievances with the "male loneliness epidemic"? 3 weeks ago:
In feminist scholarship it tends more towards the "we are all victims of patriarchy" stance. Most my friends are academics so they tend to lean the same direction, though not always.
- Comment on what are the grievances with the "male loneliness epidemic"? 3 weeks ago:
It's worth emphasising that concerns about male mental health in large part comes from feminism. Feminism is not inherently man hating, and research of gender dynamics through the lense of feminism is what made it possible to observe how patriarchal structures in society harm not only women, but also men.
It's kinda like how a marxist will tell you that even rich people are happier in egalitarian societies: Capitalism hurts everyone, including the ones seemingly profiting from it. In the same way, feminism gave way to the insight that patriarchy hurts everyone, including men.
That said, you're not wrong that here is a (perhaps more popular rather than scholarly) feminist critique of male grievances. Feminism is a bunch of different things, and there's a bunch of contradictions between different understandings of feminism.
Not too weird then that people end up hating the whole issue. Some feminists hate it because it's sympathising with the oppressor or whatever, while anti-feminists hate it because they see it as soft feminist bullshit or whatever. Having a nuanced opinion about anything this day is difficult.