Putin couldn’t care less about the support from some random programmers. Be realistic, what do you expect them to do? Take up arms? Protest and get imprisoned? Vote in the sham elections?

Targeting random civilians in hopes of political change is the strategy of terrorists.

So then you agree that there is no reason to be “glad” about this?

And how exactly is banning these contributors supposed to stop the invasion? These people have no control or culpability.

“Safe” being defined in a user-hostile manier, i.e. with unmodified Google components and not rooted.

“Google-controlled” would be a better word.

Such is the fate of hypercentralized spaces. The fediverse fixes this.

I don’t see how this is so difficult. Given the choice between a narcissistic billionaire or an independent, accountable government commission that’s bound by the rule of law, I’ll choose the latter every time.

No, you got downvoted because you were insulting and incorrect.

Do you have experience with Spanish employment law?

You can’t just compare the file sizes without looking at the quality. Each will have different quality loss depending on the exact encodings used.

“Gen Z simply uses technology more than any other generation and is therefore more likely to be scammed via that technology.”

raid is essential anyway

Why? If there are offsite backups that can be restored in an acceptable time frame, what’s still the point of RAID?

It seems like this order is rather limited and the IA can continue almost all of their work.

If you turn the fan up high enough it will blow the heat from outside into the house. Trust me, I’m a scientists.

Applying AI-voodoo to a non-existing problem with unknown side effects? Sign me up!

It’s not. Image hosting sites have existed for decades. Websites are not liable unless they have actual knowledge of illegal content and ignore takedown requests. Stop fearmongering.

Good. Hopefully this will discourage people from using Clownflare’s DNS.

In case you don’t know, Cloudflare already controls a massive amount of websites, have access to their unencrypted traffic and are making the web inaccessible for people who use tor or noscript. They are a threat to the open web.

Communication network providers in the EU generally aren’t liable for illegal activity of their users.

While it’s stupid that ISPs are using their monopolies to screw consumers, the concept of data caps is not as stupid as you might think.

You’re not just paying for the connection between you and the ISP, but also all the other data links that get your internet traffic to its destination. For example, those cables across the ocean are owned third parties and they charge money for every byte that goes through. It wouldn’t be unreasonable for ISPs to pass that cost to users.

Furthermore, most links are overprovisioned in order to keep costs down. For example, if you assume that users only use 10% of their bandwidth on average, that means you can fit 10x as many people on a connection (or maybe 8x to account for peaks). This does mean that users should be discouraged from using their full bandwidth for long durations, otherwise the network operators can’t overprovision as much and have to invest more in infrastructure.

For the last time: these language models are just regurgitating what people have said. They don’t analyze or reason.

There is: !datahoarder@lemmy.ml

It’s what the ePrivacy directive says, yes. But some get around this by claiming that it’s necessary for the operation of the device/service (doubtful) or that it has limited effect on privacy (depends on exceptions created by member states)

National courts to take EU law into account. If you don’t agree with their interpretation of EU law, your option is to appeal or ask to refer questions to the EUCJ.

Just so you know, this also creates more load on other instances, especially the larger ones.

Never repeat anything 👍

That’s not accurate. Copyright and trademark are two different things. The name “twitter” is also just a combination of preexisting characters and the word was probably in use before the company was founded. You can still trademark existing things because trademarks are about preventing consumer confusion, not protecting original creations.

Musk does have a problem with copyright if it turns out this specific design was made by someone else.

Yes, that was what I was referring to. However, this is assuming that Lemmy has properly implemented webfinger and doesn’t store direct links (which I haven’t checked).

Alternatively, you could proxy all requests with application/activity+json in the Accept or Content-type headers.

You can, but other servers will not recognize it as the same server.

There are however ways to run your server on a subdomain and make it appear as if it’s still the original domain. Is that what you’re looking for?