Follow your own link: it’s back (in archive mode).

I’m accused of being AI on other sites

Other sites? Happens here, too. The best answer is troll them by imitating AI.

it’s mostly bullies and wannabe bullies. And that most people who claim they are for social justice, aren’t. They are just for screaming and belittling other people who are different than them.’

the people doing the saying are very rarely doing anything to help the people they ‘advocate’ for so much as they are using them as a soapbox to grandstand about how they are ‘good’ and anyone who isn’t as ‘concerned’ as they are is ‘bad’.

that’s lemmy in a nutshell

even when they can do something purely through online expression like fix an inaccessible post, they’ll often still not do it: they’ll argue over it, offer nonexcuses (eg, their shitty lemmy app lacks basic features available from the website to edit posts & provide text alternatives), not fix their post, keep posting inaccessible content. these are the same people blasting each other about leftist causes, which sometimes ironically include accessibility.

they’re social justice imposters

Yeah, inceldom has coopted the word

Only if we let them, and anyone who does is an incompetent advocate choosing to let sexists decide the meaning of words for everyone else when everyone else has at least as much power to do otherwise. It’s complacent cooperation with the enemy that purports ethical superiority while being the opposite.

Older activists who understood the pitfalls of establishing their own stigmatization in the language at least had the sense not to cooperate with their enemies. They’d more creatively reappropriate or reclaim words or embrace them as terms of pride. That lesson seems lost here.

Someone who subscribes to the pretentious “punch down” concept & seems so full of themselves they toss around assumptions of “bigotry”, “racism”, “sexism”, “anti-lgbtq+phobia” on the thinnest of evidence perhaps out of insecurity. Basically, anyone who says things that are a bit sanctimonious & haughty rather than cool & thoughtful possibly because they didn’t get enough hugs growing up or maybe too many.

Anyone who fails to get references & leaps to hasty judgements. Same reason as above.

Anyone who calls their irrationality challenged “engagementbait” or “ragebait” when they can’t refute it because the challenge is absolutely correct.

Anyone who says

For me it’s saying, “we can’t joke about anything anymore”.

Sirens go off immediately 🚨

So the authors of these books?

• The female
• Females
• Single Black female
• Females and Harry Potter
• Fierce females on television: a cultural history
• Warriors, witches, women: mythology’s fiercest females
• How Can They Tell If I Am Male Or Female? Gender Stereotypes in Disney Movies
• Mistress, mother, muse: an exploration of the female in modern and contemporary Mediterranean literature
• Gender and identity in Franz Grillparzer’s classical dramas: figuring the female
• Livy’s women: crisis, resolution, and the female in Rome’s foundation history
• A heritage of her own?: Allusion and tradition in female-authored poetry of the Hellenistic age
• African American females: addressing challenges and nurturing the future
• Gender, supernatural beings, and the liminality of death: monstrous males/fatal females
• Women who fly: goddesses, witches, mystics, and other airborne females
• A house full of females: plural marriage and women’s rights in early Mormonism, 1835-1870

Or of various feminist book titles featuring the noun?

Or the vast amount of people who use the noun self-referentially in dating communities (eg, “F4F/M”), classifieds (eg, “need a roommate […] females only”), or natural communication? In conventional language, it’s an acceptable word.

Maybe you have this wrong, and instead it’s those who in effect (which may defy intent) stigmatize an entire gender by claiming their noun is wrong instead of embracing it as a word of pride.

Other tech CEOs, including Microsoft’s Bill Gates, Snap’s Evan Spiegel, and Tesla’s Elon Musk, have also spoken about limiting their children’s access to devices. Gates has said he did not give his children smartphones until age 14 and banned phones at the dinner table entirely. Snap CEO Evan Spiegel, in 2018, said he limits his child to the same 1.5 hours per week of screen time as Thiel.

Seems like these failures suing them & demanding government paternalism

Yet, as the trials against social media companies continue and country after country moves toward legislating what Silicon Valley’s billionaires have quietly practiced for years

don’t know how to effectively limit access/use parental controls as tech CEOs claim to do.

If the end user can arbitrarily sign code themselves that is bootable then it kind of defeats the purpose of secure boot.

They can & it doesn’t. They can change the platform key to become the platform owner & control the public keys they keep in the code signing databases. Secure Boot gives the platform owner control over authorized code signers of boot processes.

That’s true today, but there’s no guarantee it will be true in the future.

It’s in the specification.

The platform key establishes a trust relationship between the platform owner and the platform firmware. The platform owner enrolls the public half of the key (PKpub) into the platform firmware. The platform owner can later use the private half of the key (PKpriv) to change platform ownership or to enroll a Key Exchange Key. See “Enrolling The Platform Key” and “Clearing The Platform Key” for more information.

The platform owner clears the public half of the Platform Key (PKpub) by deleting the Platform Key variable using UEFI Runtime Service SetVariable(). The data buffer submitted to the SetVariable() must be signed with the current PKpriv - see Variable Services for details. The name and GUID of the Platform Key variable are specified in Globally Defined Variables. The platform key may also be cleared using a secure platform-specific method. When the platform key is cleared, the global variable SetupMode must also be updated to 1.

It’s a matter of clearing the platform key & enrolling your own platform key. I’ve done this before.

Typically, computers with Secure Boot let us clear the platform key from the boot menu. (You can choose to purchase only those that do.) Some computer vendors ship Secure Boot in setup mode or let the customer provide public keys to ship preloaded.

Secure Boot has always been for enabling the owner to enforce integrity of the boot process through cryptographic signatures. Linus Torvalds thought the feature makes sense.

Linus: I actually think secure boot makes a lot of sense. I think we should sign our modules. I think we should use the technology to do cryptographic signatures to add security; and at the same time inside the open source community this is so unpopular that people haven’t really worked on it.

It’s true that secure boot can be used for horribly, horribly bad things but using that as an argument against its existence at all is I think a bit naive and not necessarily right. Because if you do things right then it’s a really good thing. I would like my own machine to have the option to not boot any kernel, or boot loader, that is not signed by this signature.

he repeatedly used technicalities and weaseley language to refuse to admit it

see

Yet, Mosseri repeatedly said he was not an expert in addiction in response to Lanier’s questioning.

Even if a nonexpert claims something is clinical addiction, they’re a nonexpert & their word is meaningless. For a credible statement, they’ll need to admit relevant evidence instead of ask a nonexpert.

Imagine being asked for a medical diagnosis when you’re not a qualified physician. It’s perfectly fair to point out you’re not an expert on the matter & point out your awareness of distinctions between imprecise conventional language & precise, scientific definitions.

No one is obligated to volunteer dubious claims to antagonize themselves on the stand just because you want them to.

This is sensationalist BS and I dearly want this platform to be better than that.

This platform loves sensationalism. Same with other platforms.

An admin in their matrix room explains they lack access to revive it. It’d been intermittently going down for a while.