News just in, people are more productive using tools they’re familiar with.

I really like their local translation models. Simply saying “no AI!” feels very luddite to me for such a broad category.

I’m very much in the first camp and need to remind myself whenever I think about arriving due nuclear

Gamers, is it gay to call a bond between siblings brothership?

You joke but…

Aside from sway, I’m trying to think of a DE that doesn’t support Xorg.

Also, the petitions committee told the Tories that their response was bullshit and they needed to give a proper one. But that doesn’t really matter because of the whole new government thing.

It’s an initiative to stop game companies (EA, Ubisoft, Blizzard etc) from being able to decide if you can play a video game that you’ve bought. The example used is for the video game “The Crew” which was an online-only racing game. After the servers were shutdown by Ubisoft, the game that many people bought became unplayable.

What StopKillingGames wants, is that any company that publishes / develop games provide a way for people who own the game to continue playing it indefinitely. This would most likely come in the form of a game server that could be run by any owner of the game, and shouldn’t be a requirement that publishers / developers run the servers forever as that would be unsustainable.

For SMS / texting

This is reddit Lemmy, no one looks at the source.

After-sex related tech meme

After-sex cuddling? None of that hun, my open source project written in #rust is calling #grindset #opensource #foss #meme

From the source

Are your monitors all the same resolution, refresh rate and size?

If you look at every interaction with a Redhat developer in the context of them having KPIs / set work to do. The responses to non critical issues / MRs makes a lot more sense.

Not saying that it makes it any better tho.

I really want to be a part of good open-source projects

I get it, though I try to remind myself that perfection is the enemy of good. Especially in comparison to Discord which makes its money through [???] and is somehow only getting worse.

I based my assumptions on the parts in Revolts privacy policy, since reading the privacy policy of hCatpcha it alludes that each ‘vendor’ can select how much data they’d like to collect I assumed that Revolt only allowed them to collect IP, length of time on site and mouse movements. While they do sell information, they claim it to be anonymised and I contacted support to see how they did that for IP addresses.

Which is why I don’t really mind. The information they have of me is at most how my cursor moved, how long I took to Submit a login request, Submit a registration request, Submit a password reset / email resend request and an obfuscated IP. Seems OK to me.

That’s the part of hCaptchas policy that’s relevant to Revolt.

For the analysis, hCaptcha evaluates various information (e.g. IP address, how long the visitor has been on the website or app, or mouse movements made by the user). The data collected during the analysis will be forwarded to IMI.

Doesn’t seem that bad, when you go to log in it checks your IP, length of time on the site and mouse movements.

hCaptcha

This section has been adapted from hCaptcha’s documentation.

We use the hCaptcha anti-bot service (hereinafter “hCaptcha”) on our website. This service is provided by Intuition Machines, Inc., a Delaware US Corporation (“IMI”). hCaptcha is used to check whether the data entered on our website (such as on a login page or contact form) has been entered by a human or by an automated program. To do this, hCaptcha analyzes the behavior of the website or mobile app visitor based on various characteristics. This analysis starts automatically as soon as the website or mobile app visitor enters a part of the website or app with hCaptcha enabled.

When using the Revolt App, hCaptcha will only begin analysis when you:

Submit a login request.
Submit a registration request.
Submit a password reset / email resend request.

For the analysis, hCaptcha evaluates various information (e.g. IP address, how long the visitor has been on the website or app, or mouse movements made by the user). The data collected during the analysis will be forwarded to IMI.

Data processing is based on Art. 6(1)(f) of the GDPR (DSGVO): the website or mobile app operator has a legitimate interest in protecting its site from abusive automated crawling and spam. IMI acts as a “data processor” acting on behalf of its customers as defined under the GDPR, and a “service provider” for the purposes of the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). For more information about hCaptcha and IMI’s privacy policy and terms of use, please visit the following links: https://hcaptcha.com/privacy/ and https://hcaptcha.com/terms.

There have been cases [1] where vulnerabilities in software have been found, and the researcher that found it will contact the relevant party and nothing comes of it.

What they’re suggesting is that the researcher who discovered this might have already disclosed this in private, but felt that it wasn’t being patched fast enough, so they went public.

What does Israel have to do with this?

I’ve not seen any of these arguments. Though it may be all downvoted to hell and back.

My main gripe with adding privacy features to Lemmy is that the whole point of Lemmy is that all data is already publicly available and for Lemmy to continue working the way it does it’ll need to remain that way. And because of that there’s nothing that can be done to stop bad actors setting up an instance and selling all the data they collect.

At least in the EU (and UK to a lesser extent) no major corporation would be able to get away with selling that data, so the spent man hours on allowing privacy settings would be wasted time.