Fucking ridiculous. If you want to prevent CSAM spreading across Europe do this instead:
Yeah but doesn’t hubzilla (https://hubzilla.org/page/info/discover) applies a privacy layer to how its content it is distributed? The issue then lies also in how the social network gets implemented in function of its purpose, in hubzilla vs lemmy case for instance is a public board vs a social network
Scientist: Made up a particle
Technically all particles are “made up”, since the effects of the energy they carry can also be expressed as a waves too and altogether, indeed their nature in our current model is dual, see the utterly interesting double slit experiment.
The electrons are angry!
RiP
“It’s fine”
…it is not the fall that hurts after all /s
Matrix
Signal
Conversations
Simplex
Wire
Deltachat too, FOSS, E2EE, it relies on users’ already existing email accounts to vehicle the messages (https://delta.chat)
But I will raise people one more. Waterfox
Never heard of it, I prefer LibreWolf
https://librewolf.net/#what-is-librewolf
but I’m gonna list some other popular forks
TOR Browser (anti-censorship enhanced fork, bundled with TOR network)
https://www.torproject.org/
GNUzilla IceCat (GNU version)
https://www.gnu.org/software/gnuzilla/
Pale Moon (able to use old XUL based extensions)
https://www.palemoon.org/
Mullvad Browser (a security hardened fork, IIRC based on TOR, made by Mullvad VPN company)
https://mullvad.net/en/browser
Fennec F-Droid (Fennec version available on F-Droid, clean of propietary blobs)
https://f-droid.org/packages/org.mozilla.fennec_fdroid/
https://gitlab.com/relan/fennecbuild
Mull (hardened fork of Fenix)
https://gitlab.com/divested-mobile/mull-fenix
IceRaven (yet another hardened fork of Fenix, able to install an extended list of extensions)
https://github.com/fork-maintainers/iceraven-browser
We’ve all been there brother
Rookie numbers…
I don’t know.
I’m perplexed honestly.
I live in italy and here too government took a steep turn to the right since last elections.
It is like the most roborantly bamboozling idiocy someone from a stage can scream the more he gets applauded as the folks’ hero for speaking their unsung voices.
On the other hand if you try to build an organic and critical dialogue you only get yawned away as utterly boring.
I don’t think it is the ones screaming from their stages being the morons, well not the most moron at least, but instead they are those who give their precious votes, hard conquered from their ancestors who gift them with a life in a democracy, to these unambiguously unmistakable frauds, and who hide in the self-obliviousness of the guilty conscience for the vote they have cast their incapability of admitting their own deep existential self-inadequacy.
Surely he is indeed a tragic mistake
Then it will be something else.
Mind I’m not defending the free-guns-for-all policy so dear to a sadly large part of americans, I’m just saying that the tool is not the real issue, that one would be the finality of the action and the fecklessness, the morbidly carelessness and yet horrible thoroughness, attached to the though of ending or seriously harming another person. That one is a cultural problem, and very deep.
Sure guns were instrumental to spread and nourishing such culture, but if it wasn’t the gun then the will to kill would have been manifested through the next available tool.
But without the gun, no one would be killed by the gun.
… those ones not killed by the gun would be killed by the next lethal device in place of it, it is the will which drives the action, not the device
Blah blah blah, go actuallt do it, I’m gonna enjoy the show, genocidal human stain…
Also was this nonCredibleDefense or what, for real?
Dissociation is an ugly beast
Oh no dude, that wasn’t referred to you at all, I got and enjoyed your lighthearted humour, the comment was a just general consideration on the rhetoric I too often encounter when diving into a heavily controversial threads on the interweb; e.g. usually a rando with 5 figures karma points will suddenly pop up out of nowhere bringing up bro’mbastically that in his own singular experience the argument was true/false, therefore whatever was the hypothesis, or the wall of text of fact-checked peer-reviewed argumentation presented, it surely must be simply correct/wrong…and everyone lived happily ever after in demagogyland.
from the explanation:
This is a famous, centuries-old open question in math known as Goldbach’s conjecture. Mathematicians widely believe that it is true,it has held true for every number checked up to 4 ⋅ 1018, but since it’s impossible to check every number, we can’t assume it’s universally true
Way more than enough to make any thing true on the interweb these days
Thanks I’ve lost 30 sanity points now, and I’m now sure with a number of squares sufficently high s is gonna equal to cthulu.