atrielienz

joined 1 year ago
[–] atrielienz 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

In the TOS, I would appreciate it if you would make it clear to users signing up for Lemmy.world which legal jurisdiction the site at large falls under and that the content here must abide by because this is not made clear on the sign up page or in the TOS (it should be front and center, not several scrolls down the page, at the bottom, because it is the basis for everything else in the TOS). At the time of this comment this information also isn't listed on any sidebar, or about page for the site itself or the Lemmy.world community/sign up pages so far as I have been able to tell.

The TOS is a legal document and as such, changes should also probably be dated to reflect to existing users what has changed or been updated since their initial sign up and the fact that it is less likely for them to review the TOS at a later date unless you notify them (by email or similar) or they run afoul of the document. This adds important context both for the users and for the legal jurisdiction.

This is also important for moderators who may or may not live or otherwise be subject to the laws of the legal jurisdiction of the site, because naturally moderators will default to and be swayed by what is legal (or illegal) in the jurisdiction where they operate, and will more than likely also not be well acquainted with the laws and regulations outside of where they operate.

[–] atrielienz 2 points 1 week ago (17 children)

I would argue that it's certainly not clear. That's probably part of the problem.

[–] atrielienz 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I have a question. Why not just specifically forbid talk involving deliberate jury nullification for the purposes of essentially helping to plan or otherwise be an accessory to a crime? Or just leave it as enacting/planning/otherwise officially endorsing criminal activity is prohibited under TOS and clarify that this type of talk about deliberately planning jury nullification for crimes committed is against TOS under this rule. That's simple enough and wouldn't have taken such a meandering and lengthy post. Additionally, the statement about what jurisdiction and laws this instance is subject to can be added to the TOS and the laws clarified with links to official documentation accordingly. This post is a mess.

[–] atrielienz 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

How you can get public universal healthcare in a system designed specifically to deny it in order to make money is.

[–] atrielienz 1 points 1 week ago (3 children)

So, what you're suggesting is that there is nothing meaningful that any one human being can do in their lifetime and the end of that argument is that nobody should try.

It's like people don't understand that fighting for equality and civil rights and human rights are an ongoing thing. Martin Luther King broke the law. Was arrested several times. Did what he felt was necessary to make a difference. But he didn't stop racism so his contribution doesn't matter. He hardly helped stop it.

[–] atrielienz 2 points 1 week ago

Historically we know exactly what happens next. You more than likely wouldn't be here at all if historically class wars didn't happen. You either lack the context and understanding to empathize with millions of people who died because this man felt the need to enrich himself and the shareholders of the company at the extreme detriment to the rest of society, or you're deliberately ignoring facts to suit a personal belief and opinion.

I have often been told by people who think their politics is more important than my mental health that I don't have to interact with political posts and I can just ignore them. I'm not going to say that to you because I don't think it's fair to you. But keyword blocking on the other hand is a thing and if this detrimentally affects your mental health then you should take the necessary steps to protect it.

I find it interesting that you seem to think people who think he got a measured response and outcome to the way he lived should leave though.

[–] atrielienz 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yea but that wasn't the point of me pointing it out. The point was that they don't need to resort to such measures in order to clandestinely acquire your unlocked phone.

[–] atrielienz 2 points 1 week ago

That's very important context that I wasn't aware of. Makes the other comment about it being used as an avenue to search/seize that hardware much more believable.

[–] atrielienz 1 points 1 week ago

If I recall correctly at the time I bought mine, the specs and price generally made sense. But I honestly doubt that Valve will be partnering with anyone for this in regards to hardware after the steam deck's success except perhaps as an alternative to windows. It would honestly be better for most consumers to have that alternative in store. We want steam os to become more popular.

[–] atrielienz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I use Bazzite on a handheld and there was absolutely some tinkering at first. It's definitely not a simple as boot up and log in.

[–] atrielienz 0 points 1 week ago (6 children)

I believe EU also requires that you give up login credentials if they are biometric in nature. Meaning if you use a fingerprint reader or face unlock you are required to provide that to law enforcement when asked. So either way if they want your phone's contents they can get it.

[–] atrielienz 4 points 1 week ago

I still have a Facebook. I haven't used it in several years. Mostly at this point I have it to facetank the million and one photos my mother in law sends everyone so she's not sending them to me via text message every day at all hours.

view more: ‹ prev next ›