freedomPusher

A vast majority of the fediverse (particularly the threadiverse) is populated by people who have no sense of infosec or privacy, who run stock browsers over clearnet (e.g. #LemmyWorld users, the AOL users of today). They have a different reality than street wise people. They post a link to a page that renders fine in the world they see and they are totally oblivious to the fact that they are sending the rest of the fediverse into an exclusive walled garden.

There is no practical way for street wise audiences to signal “this article is exclusive/shitty/paywalled/etc”. Voting is too blunt of an instrument and does not convey the problem. Writing a comment “this article is unreachable/discriminatory because it is hosted in a shitty place” is high effort and overly verbose.

the fix

The status quo:

• (👍/👎) ← no meaning.. different people vote on their own invented basis for voting

We need refined categorised voting. e.g.

• linked content is interesting and civil (👍/👎)
• body content is interesting and civil (👍/👎)
• linked article is reachable & inclusive (👎)¹
• linked is garbage free (no ads, popups, CAPTCHA, cookie walls, etc) (👍/👎)

¹ Indeed a thumbs up is not useful on inclusiveness because we know every webpage is reachable to someone or some group and likely a majority. Only the count of people excluded is worth having because we would not want to convey the idea that a high number of people being able to reach a site in any way justifies marginalization of others. It should just be a raw count of people who are excluded. A server can work out from the other 3 voting categories the extent by which others can access a page.

From there, how the votes are used can evolve. A client can be configured to not show an egalitarian user exclusive articles. An author at least becomes aware that a site is not good from a digital rights standpoint, and can dig further if they want.

update

The fix needs to expand. We need a mechanism for people to suggest alternative replacement links, and those links should also be voted on. When a replacement link is more favorable than the original link, it should float to the top and become the most likely link for people to visit.

Some will regard this as an enhancement request. To each his own, but IMO *grep has always had a huge deficiency when processing natural languages due to line breaks. PDFGREP especially because most PDF docs carry a payload of natural language.

If I need to search for “the.orange.menace“ (dots are 1-char wildcards), of course I want to be told of cases like this:

A court whereby no one is above the law found the orange  
menace guilty on 34 counts of fraud..

When processing a natural language a sentence terminator is almost always a more sensible boundary. There’s probably no command older than grep that’s still in use today. So it’s bizarre that it has not evolved much. In the 90s there was a Lexis Nexus search tool which was far superior for natural language queries. E.g. (IIRC):

• foo w/s bar :: matches if “foo” appears within the same sentence as “bar”
• foo w/4 bar :: matches if “foo” appears within four words of “bar”
• foo pre/5 bar :: matches if “foo” appears before “bar”, within five words
• foo w/p bar :: matches if “foo” appears within the same paragraph as “bar”

Newlines as record separators are probably sensible for all things other than natural language. But for natural language grep is a hack.

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/13155149

other people’s iPhones more intrusive than other people’s droids

According to the linked research, all iPhones are spying on everyone within Wi-Fi range. If your phone of any kind is squawking wi-fi, all in-range iPhones are grabbing various bits of data like your MAC address and the SSIDs your phone normally looks for (e.g. your home SSID) and reports that back to Apple along with time and location data. The same study could not say the same for Google. So other people’s iPhones are more of a privacy intrusion to you than other people’s droids.

your own iPhone is less intrusive than your own droid when navigating

However, another study shows an inversion between Apple and Google when it comes to what you own and use for navigation. If you use an iPhone for navigation, the iPhone will only send one or two BSSIDs near you to Apple’s server, and the server then floods you with detailed information about other possible BSSIDs around you and their position, so your own device computes your precise location, not Apple’s servers.

Whereas if you navigate using Google’s location services, your device feeds everything to Google and Google’s server does all the work, computes your precise location, and tells you. This is of course more intrusive because Google learns your precise location and time, and (IMO) is likely interested in whatever shop you might be in.

These two studies actually seem superficially contradictory. But there is a difference between ratting out other portable devices and reporting stationary devices.

free-world proponents might be able to exploit Apple for better nav

In any case, the take-away for people living in the free world: forget about using Google Location Services to improve your navigation if you do not want to feed Google your precise location. OTOH, there seems to at least be a theoretical possibility for people not pawned by tech giants to use Apple’s API to get better-than-GPS navigation. Though I suspect it would mean many people would have to share someone’s sacrificial Apple account or get burner accounts.

I’m always on the look out for ways to improve my shitty navigation on a deGoogled phone that’s limited to a slow energy hungry GPS receiver -- without feeding the baddies.

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/13155149

other people’s iPhones more intrusive than other people’s droids

According to the linked research, all iPhones are spying on everyone within Wi-Fi range. If your phone of any kind is squawking wi-fi, all in-range iPhones are grabbing various bits of data like your MAC address and the SSIDs your phone normally looks for (e.g. your home SSID) and reports that back to Apple along with time and location data. The same study could not say the same for Google. So other people’s iPhones are more of a privacy intrusion to you than other people’s droids.

your own iPhone is less intrusive than your own droid when navigating

However, another study shows an inversion between Apple and Google when it comes to what you own and use for navigation. If you use an iPhone for navigation, the iPhone will only send one or two BSSIDs near you to Apple’s server, and the server then floods you with detailed information about other possible BSSIDs around you and their position, so your own device computes your precise location, not Apple’s servers.

Whereas if you navigate using Google’s location services, your device feeds everything to Google and Google’s server does all the work, computes your precise location, and tells you. This is of course more intrusive because Google learns your precise location and time, and (IMO) is likely interested in whatever shop you might be in.

These two studies actually seem superficially contradictory. But there is a difference between ratting out other portable devices and reporting stationary devices.

free-world proponents might be able to exploit Apple for better nav

In any case, the take-away for people living in the free world: forget about using Google Location Services to improve your navigation if you do not want to feed Google your precise location. OTOH, there seems to at least be a theoretical possibility for people not pawned by tech giants to use Apple’s API to get better-than-GPS navigation. Though I suspect it would mean many people would have to share someone’s sacrificial Apple account or get burner accounts.

I’m always on the look out for ways to improve my shitty navigation on a deGoogled phone that’s limited to a slow energy hungry GPS receiver -- without feeding the baddies.

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/13133455

It used to be that you could insert a coin into a washing machine and it would simply work. Now some Danish and German apartment owners have decided it’s a good idea to remove the cash payment option. So you have to visit a website and top-up your laundry account before using the laundry room.

Is this wise?

Points of failure with traditional coin-fed systems:

1. your coin gets stuck
2. you don’t have the right denomination of coins

Points of failure with this KYC cashless gung-ho digital transformation system:

1. your internet service goes down
2. the internet service of the laundry room goes down
3. the website is incompatible with your browser
4. the website forces 3rd party JavaScript that’s either broken or you don’t trust it
5. you cannot (or will not) solve CAPTCHA
6. the website rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
7. the payment processor rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
8. the bank rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
9. the payment processor is Paypal and you do not want to share sensitive financial data with 600 corporations
10. the accepted payment forms do not match your payment cards
11. the accepted payment form matches, but your card is still rejected anyway for one of many undisclosed reasons:
    • your card is on the same network but foreign cards are refused
    • the payment processor does not like your IP address
    • the copy of your ID doc on file with the bank expired, and the bank’s way of telling you is to freeze your card
    • it’s one of these new online-only bank cards with no CVV code printed on the card so to get your CVV code you must install their app from Google’s Playstore (this expands into 20+ more points of failure)
12. your bank account is literally below the top-up minimum because you only have cash and your cashless bank does not accept cash deposits; so you cannot do laundry until you get a paycheck or arrange for an electronic transfer from a foreign bank at the cost of an extortionate exchange rate
13. you cannot open a bank account because Danish banks refuse to serve people who do not yet have their CPR number (a process that takes at least 1 month).
14. you are unbanked because of one of 24 reasons that Bruce Schneier does not know about
15. the internet works when you start the wash load, but fails sometime during the program so you cannot use the dryers; in which case you suddenly have to run out and buy hanging mechanisms as your wet clothes sit.
16. (edit) the app of your bank and/or the laundry service demands a newer phone OS than you have, and your phone maker quit offering updates.

In my case, I was hit with point of failure number 11. Payment processors never tell you why your payment is refused. They either give a uselessly vague error, or the web UI just refuses to move forward with no error, or the error is an intentional lie. Because e.g. if your payment is refused you are presumed to be a criminal unworthy of being informed.

Danish apartment management’s response to complaints: We are not obligated to serve you. Read the terms of your lease. There is a coin-operated laundromat 1km away.

Question: are we all being forced into this shitty cashless situation in order to ease the hunt for criminals?

The cost of sending a registered letter has become extortionate (as has the cost of postage in general). So I have started delivering documents by hand instead of using the post. I have my own database of numbers just like the post office. I print the unique number of the article on the article and also on a custom form for which the recipient must sign to receive.

For example, I print “livraison recommandée n°003” on the envelope and “Recommandé N°003” on the form they sign. Someone complained saying “this is not a recommandé”. My French is dysfunctional so I have no idea how I should be referring to this number. Is “recommandée” a word reserved for the post office? What phrase should I be using?

Should I just drop the “recommandée” and say “livraison n°003”? Sometimes instead of using my own form I use the post offices form which has on it “Recommandé N°”. Should I strike out “Recommandé” and write something else?

update

I tried context.reverso.net and found these translations in an effort to distinguish a “registered letter” from “recorded delivery”:

①
(en) Any claims must be presented within 30 days of the service provided by registered letter with recorded delivery.
→ (fr) Toute réclamation doit être adressée sous 30 jours après la prestation par courrier recommandé avec accusé de réception.

②
(en) All eventual complaints concerning the non-conformity of services in relation to contractual engagements may be indicated by registered mail with recorded delivery or email to Parc Résidentiel de Loisirs L'Escapade.
→ (fr) Toute réclamation éventuelle concernant la non-conformité des prestations par rapport aux engagements contractuels peut être signalée par courrier recommandé avec avis de réception ou e-mail au PRL L'ESCAPADE.

So I think “accusé de réception” or “d'avis de réception” is the phrase I need. Can any francophones confirm? Is one phrase better than the other?

Nano Garden was a node for the Nano cryptocurrency. There is was a “cashless society” community which is now a ghost community:

https://sopuli.xyz/c/[email protected]

I would normally say refugees should move to [email protected], but it looks like there aren’t many refugees. It always was relatively dead. Which is a shame. There needs to be more people talking about the consequences of #forcedBanking.

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/13133455

It used to be that you could insert a coin into a washing machine and it would simply work. Now some Danish and German apartment owners have decided it’s a good idea to remove the cash payment option. So you have to visit a website and top-up your laundry account before using the laundry room.

Is this wise?

Points of failure with traditional coin-fed systems:

1. your coin gets stuck
2. you don’t have the right denomination of coins

Points of failure with this KYC cashless gung-ho digital transformation system:

1. your internet service goes down
2. the internet service of the laundry room goes down
3. the website is incompatible with your browser
4. the website forces 3rd party JavaScript that’s either broken or you don’t trust it
5. you cannot (or will not) solve CAPTCHA
6. the website rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
7. the payment processor rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
8. the bank rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
9. the payment processor is Paypal and you do not want to share sensitive financial data with 600 corporations
10. the accepted payment forms do not match your payment cards
11. the accepted payment form matches, but your card is still rejected anyway for one of many undisclosed reasons:
    • your card is on the same network but foreign cards are refused
    • the payment processor does not like your IP address
    • the copy of your ID doc on file with the bank expired, and the bank’s way of telling you is to freeze your card
    • it’s one of these new online-only bank cards with no CVV code printed on the card so to get your CVV code you must install their app from Google’s Playstore (this expands into 20+ more points of failure)
12. your bank account is literally below the top-up minimum because you only have cash and your cashless bank does not accept cash deposits; so you cannot do laundry until you get a paycheck or arrange for an electronic transfer from a foreign bank at the cost of an extortionate exchange rate
13. you cannot open a bank account because Danish banks refuse to serve people who do not yet have their CPR number (a process that takes at least 1 month).
14. you are unbanked because of one of 24 reasons that Bruce Schneier does not know about
15. the internet works when you start the wash load, but fails sometime during the program so you cannot use the dryers; in which case you suddenly have to run out and buy hanging mechanisms as your wet clothes sit.

In my case, I was hit with point of failure number 11. Payment processors never tell you why your payment is refused. They either give a uselessly vague error, or the web UI just refuses to move forward with no error, or the error is an intentional lie. Because e.g. if your payment is refused you are presumed to be a criminal unworthy of being informed.

Danish apartment management’s response to complaints: We are not obligated to serve you. Read the terms of your lease. There is a coin-operated laundromat 1km away.

Question: are we all being forced into this shitty cashless situation in order to ease the hunt for criminals?

cross-posted from: https://sopuli.xyz/post/13133455

It used to be that you could insert a coin into a washing machine and it would simply work. Now some Danish and German apartment owners have decided it’s a good idea to remove the cash payment option. So you have to visit a website and top-up your laundry account before using the laundry room.

Is this wise?

Points of failure with traditional coin-fed systems:

1. your coin gets stuck
2. you don’t have the right denomination of coins

Points of failure with this KYC cashless gung-ho digital transformation system:

1. your internet service goes down
2. the internet service of the laundry room goes down
3. the website is incompatible with your browser
4. the website forces 3rd party JavaScript that’s either broken or you don’t trust it
5. you cannot (or will not) solve CAPTCHA
6. the website rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
7. the payment processor rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
8. the bank rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
9. the payment processor is Paypal and you do not want to share sensitive financial data with 600 corporations
10. the accepted payment forms do not match your payment cards
11. the accepted payment form matches, but your card is still rejected anyway for one of many undisclosed reasons:
    • your card is on the same network but foreign cards are refused
    • the payment processor does not like your IP address
    • the copy of your ID doc on file with the bank expired, and the bank’s way of telling you is to freeze your card
    • it’s one of these new online-only bank cards with no CVV code printed on the card so to get your CVV code you must install their app from Google’s Playstore (this expands into 20+ more points of failure)
12. your bank account is literally below the top-up minimum because you only have cash and your cashless bank does not accept cash deposits; so you cannot do laundry until you get a paycheck or arrange for an electronic transfer from a foreign bank at the cost of an extortionate exchange rate
13. you cannot open a bank account because Danish banks refuse to serve people who do not yet have their CPR number (a process that takes at least 1 month).
14. you are unbanked because of one of 24 reasons that Bruce Schneier does not know about
15. the internet works when you start the wash load, but fails sometime during the program so you cannot use the dryers; in which case you suddenly have to run out and buy hanging mechanisms as your wet clothes sit.

In my case, I was hit with point of failure number 11. Payment processors never tell you why your payment is refused. They either give a uselessly vague error, or the web UI just refuses to move forward with no error, or the error is an intentional lie. Because e.g. if your payment is refused you are presumed to be a criminal unworthy of being informed.

Danish apartment management’s response to complaints: We are not obligated to serve you. Read the terms of your lease. There is a coin-operated laundromat 1km away.

Question: are we all being forced into this shitty cashless situation in order to ease the hunt for criminals?

It used to be that you could insert a coin into a washing machine and it would simply work. Now some Danish and German apartment owners have decided it’s a good idea to remove the cash payment option. So you have to visit a website and top-up your laundry account before using the laundry room.

Is this wise?

Points of failure with traditional coin-fed systems:

1. your coin gets stuck
2. you don’t have the right denomination of coins

Points of failure with this KYC cashless gung-ho digital transformation system:

1. your internet service goes down
2. the internet service of the laundry room goes down
3. the website is incompatible with your browser
4. the website forces 3rd party JavaScript that’s either broken or you don’t trust it
5. you cannot (or will not) solve CAPTCHA
6. the website rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
7. the payment processor rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
8. the bank rejects your IP address because it is a shared IP
9. the payment processor is Paypal and you do not want to share sensitive financial data with 600 corporations
10. the accepted payment forms do not match your payment cards
11. the accepted payment form matches, but your card is still rejected anyway for one of many undisclosed reasons:
    • your card is on the same network but foreign cards are refused
    • the payment processor does not like your IP address
    • the copy of your ID doc on file with the bank expired, and the bank’s way of telling you is to freeze your card
    • it’s one of these new online-only bank cards with no CVV code printed on the card so to get your CVV code you must install their app from Google’s Playstore (this expands into 20+ more points of failure)
12. your bank account is literally below the top-up minimum because you only have cash and your cashless bank does not accept cash deposits; so you cannot do laundry until you get a paycheck or arrange for an electronic transfer from a foreign bank at the cost of an extortionate exchange rate
13. you cannot open a bank account because Danish banks refuse to serve people who do not yet have their CPR number (a process that takes at least 1 month).
14. you are unbanked because of one of 24 reasons that Bruce Schneier does not know about
15. the internet works when you start the wash load, but fails sometime during the program so you cannot use the dryers; in which case you suddenly have to run out and buy hanging mechanisms as your wet clothes sit.
16. (edit) the app of your bank and/or the laundry service demands a newer phone OS than you have, and your phone maker quit offering updates.

In my case, I was hit with point of failure number 11. Payment processors never tell you why your payment is refused. They either give a uselessly vague error, or the web UI just refuses to move forward with no error, or the error is an intentional lie. Because e.g. if your payment is refused you are presumed to be a criminal unworthy of being informed.

Danish apartment management’s response to complaints: We are not obligated to serve you. Read the terms of your lease. There is a coin-operated laundromat 1km away.

Question: are we all being forced into this shitty cashless situation in order to ease the hunt for criminals?

I’ve noticed that if you try to contact corp or gov offices the old fashioned way, they simply ignore you. They want to force you to use email or solve a CAPTCHA. The fix I have in mind is a tweak on this idea:

https://sopuli.xyz/post/12919557

but the first contact you make with an office need not even be GDPR¹ related. If you contact a gov or corp for any purpose and they ignore it, your next request can and should include an access request for records on how they handled your initial correspondence.

¹ GDPR isn’t the only game in town. Brazil and California supposedly have some privacy law similar to the GDPR which I assume includes a right of access. Hence why they were also mentioned in the title.

#fuckEmail

It was a Lemmy service that centered on law. Now it gives a 404.

The threadiverse is starving for small decentralized nodes with a theme focus. There are far too many general purpose nodes. It’s a shame the law node is gone. There is nothing to replace it.