That can be applied to most hobbies in general. Not using an automated coffee machine? Time worth nothing. Cooking rather buying takeout? Building your own pc rather than buying prebuilt? Drawing rather than generating with AI? Time worth nothing, that’s why.
Cybersec researcher here. The content of your chat is encrypted end to end. Their servers can’t read what you write. This is because they use the same protocol as signal, x3dh and double ratchet. However, they can and will collect everything else. Contact info, for example, phone, etc
To “link” other devices you have to scan a qr from your phone, so it’s certainly possible that during that process the devices connect and share the key, and the servers don’t have it.
Or the servers could have it. Idk, it’s closed source, that’s the problem at hand.
No, the protocol is sound enough, WhatsApp doesn’t have the key, doesn’t want the key (so they will probably not be responsible for what you are communicating with others), and doesn’t need the key - as others have put so eloquently, the metadata is rich enough for them.
Sounds like it transfers the ID Out-of-band, so that’s good, does the desktop get the chat history then? (It’s possible it pulls chat history from the phone).
Oh, I agree with the closed source issue. That makes it a no-sale for me.
Initially you could only log in from one device, as it created a new private key every time you switched device. Then they implemented Whatsapp Web, which essentially required the primary device to be connected to the internet, the chats would then be transferred from the primary device to the secondary devices (I assume through an encrypted tunnel of some sorts). Then as of late they have implemented a new technology that allows you to share your private key among multiple devices, making them all the “primary device”. The chat history and all the messages can be shared from one device to another while encrypted. The weak spot at one point was the chat backup, which was unencrypted and stored in your Google Drive, so technically Google could have had access to all your chats. Today though, you can encrypt the backup through a password.
In theory Whatsapp has never needed to read your chats to have the functionality it has. That’s in theory because it’s closed source and we cannot know anything for certain. All this is just what Meta/Whatsapp said or pure speculation.
From what I understand AdNauseum is built on top of uBlockOrigin so you supposed use it instead. The thing is that it isn’t as frequently updated and due to recent YouTube wars this is currently required.
There’s actually some useful information here if you ignore the hyperbole.
If you act like a jerk and are mean to people, you will drive people away from your causes, even if you are taking a position that is strongly defensible from a moral and ethical view. If you take the view that “I don’t have to do the emotional labor to educate you, OMG read some theory, you’re fucking stupid if you can’t understand this, you don’t deserve to live if you think Y,” etc. you aren’t going to win people over. And yes, if you are always acting like an asshole, you’re probably going to drive people away that believe similarly to you, because they won’t want to be associated with assholes. That’s human nature, and something that you need to learn to contend with if you want to win adherents to any political or social position.
In other words: leftists and feminists, fucking get over yourselves.. You may not want to put in the emotional labor because it’s exhausting, but you know who will? Fascists, nationalists, misogynists, and religious fundamentalists. If you just want to make fun of and vent at people on the right, you’re only creating a more insular group that more and more people are going to end up hating. See also: hexbear,
My human nature wanted to rail against what you were saying at a certain point (especially when you called out feminists and leftists) since I can relate to your target audience, but yeah. Good words.
FWIW, I am very much a leftist. I’m mostly an anarchist, although I also recognize that having a large, diverse, functioning society is extremely difficult–bordering on impossible–without some degree of authoritarian control. (And I’ve also seen just how paralyzed radically democratic groups can get, when they have to vote on everything.) I want the people on the left, the people that want a more equal society, to do better, because I think we can be better.
Being kind to people–not fake kindness, not kindness with an agenda, but just kind–can go a long ways for leftists. For women, well, I’m not a woman. But having women as friends and them being open with me about what they experienced as women went a long way towards opening my eyes.
And, FWIW, I started from a position of being deeply conservative, very religious, and having absolutist views on gender identity and gender roles, and the godly nature of capitalism.
there’s a number of inauthentic right wingers that happily pose as leftists online to spur these sorts of things, its not something you can stop by lecturing people in online spaces.
This is good in person advice but in most cases this is a mostly online issue where bad actors and children are over represented.
I’ve absolutely, definitely met people IRL that have argued in exactly the way I outline. …Although “argue” is charitable, since they’re just haranguing their victim subject. I’ve also known plenty of people that claim that they know they aren’t going to change the mind of the person they’re verbally assaulting–because people can’t change, I guess?–but that they want to win the hearts of the people observing. …Which they also aren’t doing, since they’re appearing to be mean-spirited to observers. (And yes, there’s nuance here, and I still firmly believe in punching Nazis.)
David McRaney has been talking for a while about what actually works for changing the way people think and believe (and he just recently published, “How Minds Change”), and Anthony Magnabosco has been posting street epistemology videos on YouTube for years. Both of them have found–to be really reductive–that you need to emotionally connect with the person you’re talking to, and you need to ask open-ended questions that allow them to consider the foundations for their beliefs.
And to your point, yes, that’s hard to do online. I get it. I often fall into the trap of arguing instead of being empathetic. So I need to take my own advice.
The actual truth if you believe Christian theology. Angels AND God are fully capable of changing things, but free will is sort of like the Prime Directive in Star Trek if you want to be charitable. Uncharitably, we’re God’s play things and only a tiny fraction of the most loyal will see true reward.
The vast field of ambiguity between those two points is … kinda’ the point in why there has been so much quarrel even between Christian sects.
No, the christian god its not just capable of changing things, it is omnipotent. That means it could change things without interfering with the free will.
The point about being omnipotent vs free will is… if he does ANYTHING to change our fate, he’s corrupting free will, which is supposed to be our greatest gift.
The entire concept of an omniprescient and all powerful being is nonsensical as described by Christians. A being LITERALLY CANNOT be all knowing, all kind, and omnipotent. Not if our reality is involved.
That is why there is so much debate over the nature of god and “good”. As described, it is literally impossible, so it becomes incredibly subjective.
if he does ANYTHING to change our fate, he’s corrupting free will, which is supposed to be our greatest gift.
Not really, unless you consider that every interaction with anything interferes or “corrupts” our free will. If I plan on playing a game, but a friend of mine says “dude, don’t, you’ll regret it, it fucking sucks”, and I decide to not play, did this friend corrupt my free will?
Your analogy is a little broken. God wouldn’t be simply telling you not to. God is literally changing what you want to do, or any other number of “omnipotent” actions that are not possible by someone not omnipotent.
The concept itself is incompatible with reality that operates like ours. Ours has clear, obvious, demonstrable, and repeatable rules. If those rules change, we literally cannot tell.
Omnipotence is quite literally a pointless point when there is literally NOTHING that demonstrates power beyond the existing rules. There is literally nothing that breaks causality in our reality. Our reality and existence is quite literally incompatible with omnipotence as described in the bible.
Yes, but such a universe is still fundamentally incompatible with Christian (and most other) religious teachings.
There would be absolutely NO point in praying or asking for help in a universe with absolute free will, yet that is exactly what Christians (and many others) teach. It shows up all over in how they treat others and civil policy.
It’s why they’re so pro punishment: You make a choice to do bad things, you had free will to choose not to, so you must be bad. It’s not completely broken logic that they use, but it is absolutely not a self-consistent set of rules.
Strictly talking the logic of it, if you’re omnipotent, then you have the power do do anything, and that includes the power to do flagrantly self contradictory things, defy logic and still be logically consistent.
The “if you’re omnipotent” part is a pretty big “if”, but it’s not inconsistent to say that “anything” includes the ridiculous.
I mean… Not really. Paradoxes don’t actually exist. Causality itself would fail to work if literally inconsistent things could be magically made consistent. It’s fundamentally not how the universe works. Literally. What you ask for could exist, but not in a universe that behaves like ours. It is fundamentally incompatible with what is observed.
Yes, completely and fundamentally incompatible. Even if God could start up a billion universes with a billion rules … ours doesn’t work like that. It’s like a game character saying, “yea well the devs could totally make this RPG a FPS game!”
Is the possibility true? Yes. Though for no reason the game character will ever comprehend nor be able to ever observe. It is fundamentally a pointless point that adds no new information to the equation.
We’re discussing logical consequences of a thing, not if the thing is possible in the first place.
You don’t have to talk logical consistency to rule out “all knowing and all powerful” if you’re just looking at how things work in reality.
In reality, you can’t be all powerful or all knowing. Done, end of story. It’s impossible on the face of it.
In the hypothetical where something can be all powerful, then the power to do whatever, even in a universe that behaves like ours does, is consistent.
The power to do anything includes the absurd, inconsistent, and contradictory.
Logic requires cause and effect. If you break cause and effect, logic means nothing.
If you keep logic, then again: Paradoxes don’t actually exist. At the end of the day, something is true or it’s not. If you’re dealing with something both true and not true, you are literally and quite directly dealing with something unresolved. We fundamentally do not observe unresolved things.
It is conceptually, definitionally, not compatible with observed reality. “Observed reality” literally cannot reference such things. The question itself is nothing but a thought experiment that far too many people fail to execute.
Literally any plans, any kind of tweaks, no matter how small or how far in advance he’s playing it. If you alter events or shift things to your end goals, you have destroyed free will.
free will is sort of like the Prime Directive in Star Trek if you want to be charitable
This is a hilarious way of putting it, and as someone who hasn’t been all that steeped in christianity to be very familiar with it, that actually told me a lot 😄
That’s only the kind and charitable interpretations. There are ample stories of God directly murderizing people just for disobeying a direct order.
IMO, it’s all complete codswallop that’s been misconstrued off of the simple recordings of history and an attempt at passing on wisdom about which rulers were good and why.
After all, all it takes is some narcissistic piece of shit emperor to declare they shall be referred to as “god”, and no other rulers will even be recorded as having a similar honorific … and bam. God as described in the Bible suddenly makes perfect sense being a fickle piece of shit because he’s just a bastardized history of seemingly good rulers dealing with completely different problems in completely different ways.
Now, I don’t think that’s all of it. There is obviously much spirituality and baby’s first philosophy wrapped up in there, too.
God as described in the Bible suddenly makes perfect sense being a fickle piece of shit because he’s just a bastardized history of seemingly good rulers dealing with completely different problems in completely different ways.
This isn’t even all that far from the popular hypotheses about the history behind some of the stuff in the Bible, but the reason why the God of the Bible seems so damn fickle is that it’s likely an amalgamation of two different early Israelite / Canaanite gods: El and YHWH aka. Yahweh (and that name probably sounds familiar. Guess why!) If you’re interested in history, check out the book A History of God by Karen Armstrong, a nun-turned-atheist-historian. It’s an extremely interesting look into the prevailing hypotheses about the history of the 3 Abrahamic religions.
Now, it’s been a while since I read that book or about this in general so I’m not 100% sure I’m not mixing Yahweh and El up, but I think in general the ones where God goes all “FUCK YOU IN PARTICULAR” to some person or nation are El. In general in the “Elohist” passages that descend from stories of El, God is described as something really abstract or non-human, such as the burning bush. Also, interestingly the name still pops up in the (Hebrew-language) Bible in various forms.
In the “Yahwist” passages, God is described in a more personal and intimate way, and again if I remember right Yahwew is the more laid-back “facet” of the Biblical God. Interestingly the OG YHWH really hated farming and farmers, and there’s a general theme that farming and soil are somehow connected to evil, and you can see some that in the Bible; Cain was a farmer, for example. My own pet hypothesis for this is that that dates back to the agricultural revolution, when conservatively minded people would absolutely have thought that that newfangled woke farming bullshit is going to destroy society, and this sense of farming as a source of evil could have gotten incorporated into religion. Yahweh is also why depictions of God are forbidden.
Historical regional rulers did, however, affect eg. which god was favored, or what was part of the official religion, and on top of that a lot of the stories of different rulers and even some of the prophets in the Bible are essentially self-insert fanfic for some king or another.
If we’re going to take the Bible as stories that are somewhat partially true, I’d like to imagine that God as described was or is a supernatural nth dimensional being that allows for the manifestation of the human conscience in our moments of greatest suffering, but upholds a disassociative desire for a greater justice or harmony that can appear to many as an almost alien destructive nature and the tendency to punish, while another aspect or being above us, perhaps the same one, is basically a chilled out stoner who enjoys being lazy, exploring mushrooms as food, but doesn’t like the idea of farming and sedentary lifestyle.
Depends entirely on the religious sect. Some believe we live happily ever after in a similar condition but in paradise, some believe the believers get ascended to godhood, literally able to create universes.
It is an entire spectrum of fantasy, and that’s just the Christian sects.
free will is sort of like the Prime Directive in Star Trek
That’s a really apt comparison because they play fast and loose with the prime directive all the time, using it as an excuse for inaction while flagrantly disregarding it whenever it suits them
The great irony is, the Prime Directive is to try and control the emotional overreaction of humans and is indeed often ignored by Star Trek for supposedly moral reasons… It is terribly ironic that it makes such a perfect analogy to how God, a supposedly far superior being, is described as acting in the Bible.
In Star Trek, it’s ignored to help people. In the Bible, it’s ignored because God is having a bad day and needs to lay down some punishment without being labeled a massive hypocrite because daddy do no wrong.
I tried to correct someone’s grammar and someone else wrote a multi-paragraph response on why “should of” is an acceptable alternative to “should have”.
I’m middle-aged so I’ve already had more than my fair share of fun (I’m great at taking the ‘fun’ out of ‘too much fun’), but I think my warranty expired a few years ago. I got a new and exciting autoimmune disorder and this stupid meat suit is almost literally self-destructing
The diet; the microplastics that you eat, drink and breathe; the endocrine disruptors that you huff from your home’s PCB-finished wood floor, or dishwasher detergent buildup inside you; extremely hygienic environments which make for overeager immune systems; pollution; the pesticides that Monsanto assured you are totally safe and go great with their proprietary genemodded sterile cereals which they also assure are totally safe; the near-eternal organofluorides you get exposed to because there’s a chemical plant 100km upriver with a gung-ho attitude towards waste disposal, and all the slightly scratched Teflon pans you kept using because it’s fine; or the trillion other things we’re doing to fuck up just about literally everything that lives anywhere on this planet, including our own sorry asses
Well, as a Linux user myself, I used to do this kind of thing when I was getting started and was too damn hyped about FOSS and everything. Now, I simply ask people what they want from a computer and how much are they invested into tech.
Do you want things to be as simple as possible? Use Mac or Windows.
Do you want to learn more about how things work under the hood? Use Linux.
Gaming? Use Windows (and yes, although I’m a proud Proton user, some games just won’t work, like Valorant and PUBG).
Gaming? Use Windows (and yes, although I’m a proud Proton user, some games just won’t work, like Valorant and PUBG).
I love proton on my steamdeck, and I’d like to try to go linux vs having to stay on win10 with no updates on my gaming computer. But outside of some games not working, a lot of hardware/accessories don’t have official support either. As far as I can tell, goxlr, streamdeck, and other hardware/software I use daily, have no official support, which for items I use that often makes it pretty much a non-starter on migrating.
Thank you. I saw there is a community goxlr project on github as well. For me, not having the official support is frustrating. I spend a lot of time messing around with community projects for my homelab. I don’t want that effort transferred over to my daily driver.
What I’m really waiting for is a decent/cost effective AMD laptop I can scoop up to put linux on.
Yeah linux handles many games fine with proton and stuff, but there are too much things you give up.
Razer mouse with multiple side buttons? No GUI for setting that up, download some other hotkey software and make a custom profile on that. Open razer for RGB control.
Corsair headphones? No software, not able to get task bar icon about battery level.
Sometimes play racing games? Too bad there is no drivers for your wheel, except one that was made by some guy 5 years ago that got 60% of the features working, and to change settings you have to edit text files.
A new multiplayer game comes out that doesnt work on linux and all your friends are playing? Soon you find yourself just booting straight to windows instead of sometimes hopping on windows to play some game.
Connect a ps4 controller and linux sets it as default audio device and there is no GUI option to disable that, just gotta switch back when connecting the controller.
Boot to OS and open steam, no games are installed? Oh right you need to go mount the drive first. Watch a 10 minute youtube video where some dude explains how to auto mount drives.
Want to create a bootable windows USB and the tool that came with the OS tells you the usb stick is in use and that it needs to be unmounted, do that and then it tells you there is no usb there, because ya unmount it. Try another software but it wont select the iso file. Try google for help, top answer is “borrow your friends windows computer”
I like linux and learned a lot when using it, and will use it in the future on machines that dont need anything extra. But for my habits it just felt silly to be there, and constantly switch back to play games, or stay on linux and have a worse experience doing something, like driving games.
I am also real tech savy person and can overcome most of these hurdles, but most of my friends would never be able to overcome some of these things. I also found that many questions about linux on some forums are answered with stuff like “why on earth do you want that? Just dont do that or do something else” and that was kind of a bummer as well.
I think that your priorities are horrible. If the things you listed are enough to get you to abandon GNU/Linux, then FOSS might really not be for you. Also, you describe yourself as tech savvy, but I find that doubtful judging from the experiences you recounted and the non-technical way in which you write.
I dont really understand what you mean about my priorities being horrible. My priority is for my PC to do what i then and there need it to do, if it is to display my headset battery lever or create bootable usb media.
And I didnt say abandon, I said i like linux and will use it.
I told you that i am tech savvy, but instead of taking my word you decipher my message and say it is the opposite?
I am not the god of tech, but if a person who writes their own wifi drivers is 10 on the scale, and my father who can barely use a non smart phone is 1, i am a solid 8 on the tech savvy scale.
sopuli.xyz
Top