Using it as an adjective in some cases is fine, never use it as a noun, unfortunately due to assholes using it that way it now has a negative conotation.
Using it as an adjective in some cases is fine, never use it as a noun, unfortunately due to assholes using it that way it now has a negative conotation.
Reading this gave me an aneurism
Don’t take down your Christmas lights (inside at least). Make hot chocolate at home, create rituals for yourself
I spent half the day in the bomb shelter and the other half losing at cards.
Yep, we will, because it is in our interest. It is also in the US’s interest, but unfortunately some are too short sighted to see this.
The EU (and it’s member states) have sent almost double the amount of funding the US has.
https://www.ifw-kiel.de/topics/war-against-ukraine/ukraine-support-tracker/
This article sounds extremely fishy and borderline conspiracy-like to me.
Imho the only guarantee of privacy I need is the source code.
There is so much wrong with this post. Half of the points raised are utter bullshit
Dell’s current lineup is not to expensive (≈400) and runs Linux well
We have to wait and see for eIDAS, let’s hope with the changes to eIDAS dead, we’ll have at least a few years of the Commission not proposing some dumb surveillance shit
except an apartment costs money and so there are barriers to entry, lemmy accounts are free.
The only good analogy is “if you want to be friends with us, stop being friends with assholes”.
The latest text has not yet been released, but when it is you will see a separation between Identification and Encryption. It is also clearly stated that browsers are allowed to do whatever they want regarding recognition of CAs for encryption. tl;dr the status quo for encryption (linking a domain to a server) does not change, browsers will only be forced to recognise identity (linking a organisation to a server). This will force a re-engineering of QWACs/EV certs in general in favour of something like ntqwacs.
So jarring that you couldn’t just… Press no?
Just a heads up: new wording has killed this.
Parliament’s position on the proposed law will now be against chat control, but the fight is not over: next we have to negotiate with member states. It’s vital we keep the pressure on governments to end this madness.
No it isn’t. If you want to hear them feel free to create an account on an instance that doesn’t block them, that is how the fediverse and the real world works.
They are only isolated from those who don’t want to hear them.
It’s not a new law. The GDPR has been around for years, but meta only recently lost a legal case saying that they cannot contractually force users to provide their data in exchange for access to the service.
But the GDPR also says consent has to be freely given, some interpet this as meaning that forcing people to pay in order for their data not to be used for ads is not freely given consent.
They are not “silenced”: just like in real life they have every right to express themselves, but normal people have every right not to listen to them. This comes from a leftist btw.
This is more than likely illegal in the EU…
Vinegar, Lemon juice and warm water.