deleted by creator

It’s definitely an advert.

deleted by creator

I thought it was something to do with Kim Dotcom’s Mega at first. Such a dumb headline.

deleted by creator

Sounds better than when we let those with the means, and then some, get state handouts…

Dominance over the definition of the word dominance even

Scottish Tories getting an awful lot of coverage in that story, somebody at BBC Scotland appears to be a fan.

What’s your alternative to democracy after this “peaceful revolution”? Who’s in charge? You?

Is this revolution anarchist, communist, fascist, or something else?

And what kind of democracy are you talking about? There are many varieties, with some being far better than others.

I thought it was the 51st?

Christians regularly ignore the 10 commandments, the most basic of rules in their religion. Of course they’ll ignore the stuff that means they can’t eat tasty pork

What does “exposed your alt on .ca” mean?

Can you intertwine Lemmy accounts from different servers somehow?

It validates that governments can see what’s happening on Telegram, and that makes Telegram a target.

They can’t go after the likes of Signal because they have very little to go on in the first place. They can’t say definitively what’s happening there as they can’t see any messages. Unlike Telegram.

It’s not a conspiracy that Signal are compromised, so they’re being ignored. They’re being ignored because there’s nothing to see, so governments might as well spend resources going after the apps where information is visible instead. At least they might get a result. E2EE apps are too difficult.

Signal only delivers a promise that their E2EE will be enough to make the information govts get useless.

Signal do more than just a promise. Their encryption techniques are available to see. You can confirm if it’s enough protection for you or not. Telegram are the ones making a promise. I’m not saying they’ve broken their promise (as evidenced by the arrest).

But it is just a promise when Telegram still has the ability to see messages. Signal can’t see messages and therefore don’t have to rely on a promise that can be broken (willingly or not). They instead rely on encryption, which appears to be far stronger than any promise could be.

For all we know, this is performative and the French government already has access to Telegram’s servers and can see everything. If they have access to Signal’s, oh well, they can’t see shit.

Surely you can’t be advocating for for-profit private companies to pay for their own mess? What would the shareholders think?

How are we supposed to continue to create wealth for those who don’t need any more wealth if we demand they use their own ill gotten gains to clean up their mess?

That doesn’t make any sense at all!

(/s)

What a strange story. First, they call the middle of Lidl infamous, not famous. What’s infamous about it?

Second, they do a mass product recall because of one complaint? They claim the product has had stringent testing and has sold for years in Europe without issue, but they recall it due to one complaint?

If the complaint is legitimate, then this is a good thing, but I just can’t wrap my head around their claim of stringent testing and crumbling at the merest mention of an issue. I also don’t understand what the issue with the igloos really is, they appear no less dangerous than a fence or hedge

Russia has been invaded plenty of times

With F-16s, HIMARS, and drones?

Modern warfare isn’t the same as Germany in WW2.

deleted by creator

Does that matter? If you’ve only got £100 to your name and you break the law, the courts don’t normally give a toss. You still have to pay lawyer fees and fines even if it means you go into debt.

Why should a for-profit company be treated any differently?

It might even be the catalyst to bring them back into national ownership and be rid of the root problem that made them break the law in the first place.

It’s not about offending. It’s about stereotyping and prejudging people.

It’s very easy to go from Russia/ Israel does bad things so the Russians/ Israelis aren’t welcome, to xenophobic hatred of all Russians/ Israelis.

It’s a fine line to balance because obviously, being Russian/ Israeli associates you with the actions of your country, and a certain percentage of the population in those countries will agree with their government’s policies. But not all of them do, and to make general sweeping statements like none are welcome leads you close to the xenophobia that those opposed to Russia/ Israel tend to condemn.

In WW2 America rounded up and imprisoned loads of Japanese-Americans, regardless of whether they supported Japan or had any evidence of them aiding Japan. This has generally been viewed as a bad thing done to innocent people. Rhetoric like this could lead to a similar situation.

People are people. Some good, some bad. Some perform shitty actions on purpose, some perform shitty actions through ignorance, and some oppose shitty actions. But where someone is born doesn’t determine if they’re shitty or not, so sweeping statements like “Israelis are not welcome” gets far too close to xenophobia for some people’s liking.

Obviously, what Russia and Israel are doing is awful and must be condemned, but a bit of casual xenophobia isn’t going to do anything to stop them. Official blocks of official teams would do far more to hinder them and their image of acceptance in the international community than blocking their citizens from spectating.