In context, defeating the privacy exposure of requiring to use CC details would be buy getting an a anonymous credit card, which in most countries are now either very difficult to obtain or simply no longer offered (outlawed).

Hope that helps.

Face scan is actually much easier to defeat than CC details.

Nowadays with VISA '3D Secure' and the equivalent on Mastercard you have to validate your legal name attached to the credit card, this is done via third-party which can request details your bank has on file (often your home address or mobile number), and even while those details are not supposed to be shared with the merchant (we know how careful banks are about keeping control of PII), the core detail - your legal name, is confirmed. It is not hard to tie a user to other data via data brokers once you have their legal name, and credit card number, and any other details they may share with the service (email, phone, etc).

Thanks for the info, I've never heard of Comalco alfoil. Then again I also never hear kids drinks called 'poppers' (just pop-tops) nor toasties 'Brevilles' 🫠

Fun blog post.

In Australia we call aluminium foil 'alfoil', and have for 40 years or more.

Do other English-speaking countries not?

What an odd moral framework you have scaffolded.

Cannibalism: no issue at all.

Terrible idea. Learn about prions.

Murder: some issues, but it's "often understandable or justifiable".

I live in a society where killing someone is extremely rarely understandable or justifiable, and that is the prevailing attitude worldwide. Maybe you can clarify.

"Humans are incapable of living without harming other organisms".

Entirely false premise. We can live very healthy as frugivores, nothing at all needs to die.

Drawing an equivalence between cannibalism and 'people gotta eat bro' with a "context matters" is wild. We're discussing the consumption of enemy flesh as a strengthening exercise - absorbing their spirit's life-force, and the life force of their ancestors that's the context of past Maori cannibalism we were diacussing, not eating for sustenance or out of a dire emergency.

Oh hey look, it's those reactionary uninformed statements I was talking about.

I wrote less than a hundred words, an essay? Please. The core of my point was that it's worth reading the history before you spout off a strong opinion.

Advice you obviously didn't follow, or you'd have learned that many of Cook's actions were positive, and far more restrained than armed forces in modern day.

Ah yes, I said Cook was a complex person and the history of his interactions and the native peoples interactions was worth reading (not that I consider him a good or bad man), so that's the same as people saying they like Trump right? Gtfo here with your false-equivalences and gatekeeping Lemmy; I'm staying right here. But I will be doing it from now on with one reactionary blowhard voice filtered out of the conversation.

Nice!

I just had a look and so far they just have episodes 1, 3, and 4, and they seem to be releasing new ones weekly at a glance.

Good for people to check out if they've never watched the show before (like me), but not exactly binge-ready yet. I hope they make all the rest of the episodes available.

Episode 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y235YEQstLo

I uhh, I don't think my comment is in agreement with your statement.

I feel like "it should be considered in historical context, with an understanding of the prevailing norms of the time" is generally a pretty reasonable attitude to be honest.

Were the Maori's "brutal savages" because they engaged in cannibalism of conquered rival clansman, or were they "noble warriors" engaging in a cultural norm pushed upon them by the harsh conditions of their society at the time?

Most would say that anyone engaging in cannibalism today is a murderous psychopat. Do we then judge everyone in the last hundred years the same? 200? Where's the line? What about an uncontacted tribe we discover tomorrow that still engages in cannibalism - do we consider the context of the society and environ they live in, like an anthropologist would, or just label.. 'Nup, savages'.

Gosh its just a race to figure out the source. Could be an old paper mill maybe that left waste paper on grounds, could be old landfill or maybe from fire stations in the area. Who knows?!

Do these journos not read their own goddamn paper?

The Guardian identified it as AGC Chemicals in their own investigative report three years ago - they've been pumping chemical effluent to the equivalent of many tonnes of solid chemical waste into the River Wyre which runs through Lancashire that are know to include PFAS. They followed this up with a report late last year that pointed out that regulators are turning a blind eye to AGC Chemicals continued pollution by not even testing for PFAS in their output effluent.

It seems The Guardian is now turning a blind eye too, because they didn't mention AGC Chemicals once in this FUD story that seems to be raising plenty of concerns and anxiety from residents while saying nobody is sure where any PFAS are coming from.

Have I missed something or misread?
This is stupid?

I'm no defender of colonialism, but as with most subjects absolute statements like this miss a lot of the truth.

Cook was a complex person who lead an interesting life, and often defended native people's culture and independence. His Wiki article is well worth a read, his opinion and beliefs in it are not a rewrite of history either, they are largely straight from his reports back to the British admiralty as they happened, and taken from his journals post-humously.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Cook_and_indigenous_peoples

Cook described the Māori as brave, noble, open, benevolent, devoid of treachery, and having few vices.[170][171] He believed that Aboriginal Australians were happier than the British because they enjoyed social equality in a warm climate and were provided with all the necessities of life, and therefore had no need of trade with Britain.[172] While such views partly reflected Enlightenment ideas of the noble savage living in a state of nature, they were contrary to the popular notion in Britain and among Cook's crew members that indigenous people were savages living in societies inferior to British civilisation.[173][174] Thomas argues that Cook's depiction of Aboriginal Australians was also an implied critique of his own mission to open up trade with new lands.[172]

Cook sometimes questioned the idea that contact with Europeans would benefit indigenous people. In 1773, he wrote: "we debauch their Morals already too prone to vice and we interduce among them wants and perhaps diseases which they never before knew and which serves only to disturb that happy tranquillity they and their fore Fathers had injoy'd. If any one denies the truth of this assertion let him tell me what the Natives of the whole extent of America have gained by the commerce they have had with Europeans. [sic]"[175]

Whereas his crew saw the cannibalism of the Māori as a sign of their savagery, Cook viewed it as merely a custom that they would discard then they became more united and less prone to internal wars.[176][177] He reported that the Polynesian peoples shared a common ancestry, a tradition of long sea voyages, and had developed into different nations over time. According to Thomas, his comments reflect a more historical and less idealised approach to understanding indigenous cultures than was common in this period.[178]

After his death in battle at Hawaii, he was worshiped (literally his bones at a shrine) for well over 50 years - multiple generations.

In Tahiti, after Cook's death, he was venerated as an atua with rituals and offerings – but over time the rituals ceased and the memory of Cook diminished.[83] British visitors to Hawaii from the 1780s reported that Hawaiians regretted killing Cook and that he was regarded as a Lono-nui, or ancestral being, who would come again and forgive them. In 1823, the missionary William Ellis reported that Cook's bones were still held in a shrine and used in ceremonies. However, by the 1830s, the influence of Protestant missionaries had led to a view, particularly among young Hawaiians, that god had killed Cook because he had spread venereal disease and allowed himself to be worshipped.

Great article that I think will not be read by anyone that needs to hear its message. Primarily because it's not going to make any 10 second content or images on the 'rage farms' that they inhabit. I don't know how we remedy that, but it's a big problem.

Very resonable (imo) response from Gargron (lead developer of Mastodon):

I’ve forwarded your question to our legal help and will provide an answer as soon as they give it to me. What you must understand is that our lawyers don’t have experience with federated platforms, and we don’t have experience with law, so we meet somewhere in the middle. Meta presumably has an in-house legal team that can really embed themselves in the problem area; our lawyers are external and pro-bono and rely on us to correctly explain the requirements and community feedback. The draft has been around for something like a year and none of the community members pointed out this issue until now. I’ll add one thing:

"My assumption, {.. shortened for brevity ..} is that when you post content it gets mirrored elsewhere, and this continues until a deletion notice is federated. So I'd assume if an instance somewhere mirrors my content they can't get in trouble for it, and I'd also assume that if there is a deletion or maybe a block and a reasonable interpretation of the protocol would say that the content should be removed, I could send them a takedown and at that point they'd have to honor it."

The goal of the terms is to make assumptions like this explicit, because assumptions are risky both sides. Just because luckily there were no frivolous lawsuits around this so far doesn’t mean there isn’t a risk of one.

Cory has had a much more calm response on a fediverse post, offering to reach out to the EFF's lawyers for assistance in drafting a better ToS for Mastodon, and other experienced lawyers have offered help also. Amongst the usual negativity from some users.

I'll be keeping my eye on the outcome but so far it looks positive.