One of the big problems social and collaboration platforms is people go to where the people are, like Lemmings, with disregard to principles and ethics. I go to the ethical venues regardless of where the people are. Instead of feeding a harmful network effect, I would rather feed free and open spaces. If I were to contribute to MS Github, I would have to consider myself part of the problem.
That bug tracker is in MS Github - a place I will not go. And I have yet to find an organised or simple way to find downstream trackers. I generally check Debian but when a pkg is not in official Debian then I report to !bugs@sopuli.xyz and !bugs_in_services@sopuli.xyz.
Did you report the bugs on the Lemmy github?
No, and I wouldn’t. I created this community specifically for reporting bugs when bug trackers are in bad places like Github:
Most people are indeed probably using Firefox
The cross-posting problem is specific to Tor Browser, which is Firefox based. But that one was fixed in 0.19.5.
I was actually shocked to recently learn many are using their phones, which often means 3rd party apps (and which would not have any of the stock UI bugs).
0.19.5 only fixes one of the 4 bugs (cross-posting). None of them seem to be mentioned in the change notes.
141 servers are already running 0.19.5
Ungoogled Chromium and Tor Browser are perhaps less popular than they should be.
Yes, that’s a good tip and I use it. But that doesn’t replace the search tool on the stock Lemmy app of the instance. Usually lemmyverse is just a precursor to a localized search.
When you cross-post, there is a pull-down search dialog that has a quite limited number of slots and they’re often filled up with centralised instances. Then it becomes a pain to cross-post. The only other option is to use the full screen search page to go straight to the target community, then paste everything over.
Lately lemmyverse craps out a lot, likely due to popular demand.
FCC blocks Tor so I can’t see the page, but I just wanted to mention a hack if number porting is refused for some reason (based on @Yeno@lemmy.world’s hint that it could be): downgrade the vz contract to the full extent possible (ideally make it a prepaid acct if that’s possible, so you can nix the monthly fee). Then dial whatever magic code forwards your vz number to your new number.
So not what their running debt is but only whether they can take on a new, specific one.
I knew the criteria was out of the hands of EU-based lenders, but didn’t realise the data is also out of reach to the lender. I suppose it makes sense that the lender would get no info other than a yes or no, if lenders have no discretion.
I noticed A shop had a rediculously priced phone (like €800+, something I would never buy) but advertised something like €9 if you take a contract. So it’s effectively a loan factored into a locked-in phone service plan. IIUC, the phone shop must arrange that with a bank and does not have the option of taking on risk, and then the bank asks the central bank if customer X can handle that loan, correct?
You can reverse payments through the bank in the EU as well but it’s seldom necessary, since the companies tend to revert the charge willingly when confronted by the consumer protection bureaus.
I’ve only had to resort to bank reverse a couple if times.
One was when I ordered a pair of shoes of what appeared to be an Italian website. It later turned out it was a scam site that listed popular models that were not made anymore and then sent you a ridiculously poorly made knock-off copy from China. I explained the issue to my bank and showed the knockoffs I got and a week or so later the charge was reversed.
That’s quite a surprise. I heard SWIFT/IBAN transfers were permanent and irreversable. I heard of mistakes being corrected but it required the two banks to collude and the bank of the recipient to do a money grab on their account, which I suppose would be impossible if a criminal closes their account. I wonder if your bank took a loss or if they colluded with the other bank. IIRC, banks have a minimum “investigation” fee of like €25 plus an hourly rate to pay bankers to deal with bad transactions. Did your bank offer that service for free?
The only similar things I know is the central bank keeping a listing of “unpaid credit” which make ban you from getting any new credit for a certain time.
Indeed that’s what I’m talking about. In Belgium it seems consumers have no control over whether a creditor can access the central bank’s records. Apparently the central bank simply trusts that creditors are checking records in response to an application for credit. I would like to know if any EU countries make use of an access code so consumers can control which creditors can see their records.
I don’t mean to imply anything about scoring, but certainly there must be some kind of mechanism to expose bad debtors to lenders.
In Belgium, there are no private credit bureaus but there is a central bank. Belgian banks are obligated to report loan defaults and cash transactions to the central bank, and creditors are obligated to check the central bank’s records. Consumers have no way to control creditors access to their records in the central bank. It seems to be trust based. The central bank apparently trusts that a creditor is checking a consumer’s file in connection with an application for credit by the consumer.
I wasn’t aware of the “Privacy Shield”, but the article mentions that:
“In the Schrems II judgement, the CJEU raised several points regarding the U.S. intelligence agencies’ access to EU data. The EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework tackles them and includes significant improvements compared to the mechanism having existed under the Privacy Shield.”
Found this and this to help me catch up on this.
(edit) in this doc I counted 81 “should”s and 33 “shall”s, to get an idea of the strength.
Wish I could see it. www.onem.be seems to be dropping my packets.
“One more step…”
Nothing like a privacy abusing Cloudflare site to expose privacy abuse. If anyone has openly accessible Cloudflare-free links, or can post the info for the excluded people, plz post.
eclic.ro is an exclusive Cloudflare site just like change.org is. Exclusivity is obviously quite lousy for democracy. Better alternatives are here:
privacytools.io always was shit show even before the infighting. They put their own endorsement site on Cloudflare. Despite a collossal pile of dirt emerging on #Signal:
https://github.com/privacytools/privacytools.io/issues/779
PTIO continued endorsing Signal non-stop, refusing to disclose the issues. That was also before the breakup. Dirt was routinely exposed on PTIO endorsements and it never changed their endorsement nor did they reveal the findings on their website.
Now both factions are hypocrits just as they were when they were united. The original PTIO site is back to being Cloudflared (nothing like tossing people coming to you for privacy advice into the walled garden of one of the most harmful privacy offenders), and Privacy Guides has setup on a CF’d Lemmy node. The hypocrisy has no end with these people.
Interesting, but that does not help because Mint jails all their docs in Cloudflare.
Also worth noting that #Ubuntu and #Mint both moved substantial amounts of documentation into Cloudflare (the antithisis of the values swiso claims to support). I have been moving people off those platforms.
BTW, prism-break is a disasterous project too. You know they don’t have a clue when they moved their repo from Github.com to Gitlab.com, an access-restricted Cloudflare site. There are tens if not hundreds of decent forges to choose from and PRISM Break moved from the 2nd worst to the one that most defeats the purpose of their constitution.
It might be useful to find dirt on various tech at prism-break, but none of these sites can be trusted for endorsements.
The prism-break website is timing out for me right now. I would not be surprised if they were dropping Tor packets since they have a history of hypocrisy.
If you look in their bug tracker, it actually reveals that they ignore dirt that has been dug up on their suggestions.
As others have mentioned there is little in the way of justification for these suggestions, and while I happen to agree with plenty of them, I’d personally like to see more reasoning, if not to appease people that already have opinions then to help newer users understand their options.
Indeed. In fact it’s actually worse than you describe. Swiso witholds negative information. They don’t want to inform people. They want to steer people. For example, swiso’s endorsements for donation platforms have some quite serious problems:
https://codeberg.org/swiso/website/issues/141
swiso is also aware of the serious issues with Qwant and the serious issues with DuckDuckGo. Not only failing to remove them but also failing to inform. Qwant and DDG are both Microsoft syndicates!
(if anyone is interested, one of the most privacy-respecting search services is Ombrelo¹, which is largely unknown to the world because PTIO, swiso, and prism-break don’t do the job they claim to do)
And swiso is aware because that’s their bug tracker.
/cc @Imprint9816@lemmy.dbzer0.com
¹ https://ombrelo.im5wixghmfmt7gf7wb4xrgdm6byx2gj26zn47da6nwo7xvybgxnqryid.onion/
There is a new law that allows merchants to stop giving paper receipts.
The forced use of e-receipts in Europe (France, Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, England, & Italy)