b3nsn0w

only two-letter tlds are controlled by specific countries. i forget who owns the specific tld for .world but i doubt they can pull this trick, there’s a lot of competition there

none of which goes to the mods of course, they should just be grateful for their landed gentry status after all

It’s not really possible as long as Lemmy is a website. E2EE works on Matrix because it’s an app, and therefore it can manage your encryption keys in ways a browser cannot do for you. (You can save things in the client, but not in a reliable enough way for something like the master key for every communication you ever had that if you lose you get locked out of all your chat history.) In the case of Lemmy, the signing keys for your federated actions are handled by the server, which is perfectly fine for 99% of what you use Lemmy for (public posts and comments), but it also means that even if they implemented E2EE for chats, the keys to decrypt the convo would be right on the same server.

That’s why Lemmy actively pushes you to set up a Matrix account, because Matrix makes better tradeoffs for the purposes of messaging, while Lemmy’s tradeoffs are more relevant to a link aggregator style social media.

i find their asking price fair tbh. yeah, it’s not competitive spec-wise, but it’s what they have to do to keep up their model. they’re not big enough to make their own components like screens or have someone make a screen just for them, so they need to find components that will be available for seven years. fair trade materials are also more expensive because all that slave labor and shit does give the not so fair alternatives an edge in the market. the r&d cost for a small phone manufacturer is also spread across fewer units, components also cost more when you’re ordering them in smaller amounts, supporting the phone for seven years has its associated costs (on top of not having your customers buy phones 2-3x more frequently), and the sustainable business model does also have overhead compared to riding the razor on the stock market or being VC-funded.

the fairphone is not cheap, but if you care about what they do, care about actually owning your phone (both in terms of rooting and os access, and in terms of hardware access and repairability), and would like to be able to use it for a long time, this is just what it takes. if apple or samsung or google made a fairphone, it would cost less due to their scale, but it would still cost more than the phone you have with the 888. but if you can feel a single-gen upgrade there, you’d likely want to upgrade at a higher frequency anyway.

from what i’ve seen, some people do use phones the way you do, but a lot of people only swap phones when needed. for them, a fairphone that they can keep for 5-7 years and keep alive even if something happens to it could still be cheaper than the 2-3 other phones they’d need over the same period of time.

it’s worth noting that while on android you can be like 4-5 major versions behind and still receive first class app support, on ios apple decides your phone no longer sparks joy and refuses you the next ios version, you’re slowly but surely going to lose all your apps. on the developer side, apple is extremely hostile to the practice of using older versions of their apis, they constantly push you toward newer apis that only work with the latest os and discourage using the older ones. some apps, like vlc, still manage to support older iphones, but it’s an ordeal and a half, so on the user side, not being on the latest ios isn’t really a proper experience.

the iphone 6s was actually the longest supported iphone, receiving the latest ios for 83 months after release. that’s just one month shy of fairphone’s 7 years. however, the average iphone only gets five years of real-world viability*, which is, yes, better than the 2-3 years android gets (usually with way more transparently planned obsolescence than apple does), but it’s not better than the 7 years of true viability that fairphone offers. they upgraded to android 13, that alone would last you until 2026 because of the way android apps are written.

*yes, you can use your iphone past that, hell, you can even use it after you stop getting security fixes, which tends to happen about 3 years later. but how is that different than using an old android device that’s also not receiving support?

my current phone has the same soc and there are absolutely no issues there. will report back once i get my fairphone 4, hopefully tomorrow

if you’re not gaming on your phone (and if you are, 1. why, 2. get a steamdeck), i honestly don’t see how you would notice the soc. the only time i ever noticed that my phone was weak in the past five years (and my current phone is the only one that was low-mid-range, not actual low-end, save for an iphone se 3rd gen i had for half a year) was during zooming into an abnormally large upscaled r/place image. a phone’s performance is not really something that should be a consideration for the average user nowadays, anything can run basic apps that should have been websites and play back video. the mid-tier 2021 soc in the fairphone 4 definitely qualifies.

if the complaint is about the fairphone 3, then absolutely fair, i do remember that that one did manage to be hella slow. i wanted one back then and it was one of the major issues.

the fairphone 5 is rumored to come out this year, hopefully it will address those issues

Hella interesting. Turns out you’re right, which makes the damage they’ve managed to do to lemmy.blahaj.zone kinda crazy. I guess they must have pwned a head admin, because the site was empty, which I assumed couldn’t have been done without DB level access.

Update: I was wrong. XSS was indeed the primary attack vector.

XSS was not the primary attack vector, it was just used to deface the site. Given what lemmy.world looks like right now, and how lemmy.blahaj.zone looked like without JS before the admins took back control, it is evident that the hackers were able to take control of the site on a database level. The magnitude and nature of changes are extremely unlikely to have been possible through the Lemmy API.

Password hashes are extremely likely to have been stolen, but luckily Lemmy has sane password storage practices (bcrypt at a difficulty setting of 12) so if your password is decently strong, it’s incredibly unlikely to be compromised. Still, changing it is a good idea.

Furthermore, the site’s JWT secret is stored in the database, so worrying about tokens is futile, the hackers can generate new ones on-demand. This will be the instances’ jobs to sort out after they have taken back control.

Matrix, which is pretty much an encrypted and open-source Discord clone (at least in the same fashion as Lemmy would be a Reddit clone). I personally use Element to interact with it and have a matrix.org account, but Matrix is just like the fediverse, you can choose any instance or client you want, or even host an instance yourself. In your Lemmy settings you can set up your Matrix user, right below your email address as of 0.18.1, and if you do, a new buttons saying “send secure message” will show up on your profile, next to “send message”, which will redirect people trying to message you to Matrix.

google does seem to be the main culprit, but facebook still played a role as far as i’m aware. these two companies also colluded a lot so i wouldn’t trust either of them with anything federated

i mean, the root comment of this chain literally says “how about we defederate them because / not because”. it’s not exactly an unrelated topic.

whether or not it’s okay to defederate from someone just because they’re evil is a good question though, but i still don’t think it’s an ad hominem. an ad hominem, in the popular understanding and in the sense presented in your pyramid chart, is a fallacy of devaluing an argument because of the one who said it. it’s like i said “i don’t believe gravity exists because it’s the zuck who said it”, not “i don’t trust the zuck as a person and therefore don’t want to work with him”.

i think the argument you present here takes ad hominem to an absurd extreme, where literally any discussion of a person would become an ad hominem. it could technically fit a definition of an ad hominem, and yeah, a lot of arguments are just arguments of definition where we posit that the other person discusses the topic with our own definitions, by which they’re obviously wrong. so to avoid that, yeah, under this definition it would be an ad hominem, but under this definition it means little that something is an ad hominem, discussing a person doesn’t automatically devalue an argument.

the thing that earned ad hominem its low spot on your pyramid are the incorrect and baseless conclusions inherent in the former definition presented here, not the mere presence of a person in the argument. your latter definition is definitely valid, but it’s unconventional and isn’t consistent with the pyramid.

yep, it’s important that we have this capability, but it’s also nice that unlike other platforms that do their best to lock you in, lemmy actively pushes you toward a safer alternative

Saying distrust is an ad hominem is one of the takes ever, lol. And that’s what all of this boils down to, trust. Do we trust Meta with not exploiting all of our data, and turning it against us at the earliest opportunity? Do we trust Meta that they want to contribute to the fediverse, and not just hurt it because it’s a competitor?

By the same logic, blocking or banning a person instead of vetting every post and comment of theirs would also be an ad hominem. But at the end of the day, it’s just practical. Meta has a long and not so proud history of being extremely anti-consumer, and shoving that track record under the rug, trying to absolve them of responsibility and consequences for their actions, under the thought-terminating cliche of an ad hominem is neither productive nor practical.

Yes, people are mad at Meta, and yes, the distrust means their actions are scrutinized more than they otherwise would be, but that doesn’t mean that their actions aren’t actually massively anti-consumer, and that they aren’t a massive liability. In this particular case, you can make the argument that they had a legal obligation to hand over the data, had they not tried to build a walled garden with no privacy they wouldn’t have had the data to hand over to begin with.

(also, unrelated: you can embed images using the ![](https://image_url) syntax, and you can even add alt text in the brackets to help users with screen readers)

my understanding was that while google is the main culprit, facebook and google both played a big part in killing it. but since we’re discussing meta/facebook here, and they’re not blameless, i focused on that.

but yeah, fuck google too.

they can also scrape them. that’s not really the point.

people can dm on lemmy, and only the two instances that host the people on either end of the dm (which may even be the same instance) store that dm. that instance may actually receive a subpoena. but all of this is heavily discouraged by the lemmy interface itself, instead prompting people to set up a matrix account instead, and matrix chats are end-to-end encrypted.

yeah, the difference is pretty stark:

• lemmy: we’ll give you a way to dm anyone on site, but please don’t use that, if you set up an app on this other open source service we’re not affiliated with (which is basically an encrypted discord) we’ll do our best to make it as seamless for you as possible. we’ll keep warning you for your own privacy.
• meta/facebook: aggressively keeps you on-platform for spying purposes; literally killed xmpp a decade ago and they’ll fuckin do it again (if we let them)

They trust me. Dumb fucks.

- Mark Zuckerberg

(yes it sounds like satire but that’s a real quote)

So you openly admit that you’re just detracting from it, focusing on a technicality.

I’m not considering the surface-level meaning of your words here. I’m considering your actions, because it’s a hell of a lot harder to lie with actions than with words. And your actions clearly show that you’re just propping up Germany’s policy of shutting off nuclear and therefore having to run coal where they wouldn’t have had to – and your claim here also confirms that you’re willing to be disingenuous and borderline trollish to do that.

But thank you for confirming that you’re out of arguments on that topic. I wish your country’s leaders could also be this reasonable, because their policy pollutes the same planet the rest of us are also stuck on.

No, but you could have sold the SUV instead to get the Prius. Your analogy fails beyond this point for the same reason your entire reasoning about nuclear fails: because you have chosen two cars that are the same level of harmful to the environment. Nuclear and fossils are not even close to the same level. So let’s rephrase this, so that it can actually convey the point we’re discussing:

You have two cars, a diesel pickup and an electric pickup. You need two cars and have the opportunity to get a Prius. You sell the electric pickup to get a Prius, instead of the obvious move of selling the diesel pickup.

Yes, technically you did not replace the electric pickup with a diesel truck. You just haven’t touched the diesel truck.

Still, what you did is functionally equivalent of selling the diesel truck to get the Prius (which was the expected behavior), and then replacing the electric truck with a diesel truck because you hate electric trucks for some reason. And that is my point. I don’t consider your actions in a vacuum, I consider it in the context of your potential. At the end of the day, your fleet still consists of a diesel truck and a Prius, while it could have been an electric pickup and a Prius, which would have been far cleaner.

In the meantime, your French friend sold their diesel pickup and now driving around with a BEV and a PHEV. And you complain that I point out that they did a much better job at reducing their environmental impact than you did. Which was my entire point from the beginning, not the technicality you insist on zeroing in on.

Your argument still boils down to the same logical fallacy that I’ve addressed already.

Germany could deploy X amount of renewables. They had a chance to replace something in the grid. They chose to replace nuclear and keep coal, which is the same difference as if nuclear was replaced with coal. You wasted your chance at shutting down coal plants and instead got rid of a far cleaner energy source, out of fear.

Also, France produces about 40-50 TWh more energy per year than Germany, which about accounts for their hydro advantage. The playing field is as even as it could be, which is why this example showcases the German energy policy’s abject failure. And sure, maybe you’ll only be pumping 10x as much CO2 to the atmosphere as the French for, say, 10-15 years – that’s a hypothetical compared to today’s reality, and even then, how will you justify that decade of environmental damage to future generations?

Even on your own map, almost every country in Europe that’s not already in a lighter category is trending clearly down. Germany is one of the very few outliers, joining the pack with Poland, Estonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia. Is that really all that Germany is capable of? Or are your priorities just clearly misplaced?