For me specifically, the setup and config oftentimes is what I’m doing with the computer, the learning and knowledge gained from the practice is what I’m after, which is good because it’s significantly less fun than it used to be.
Admittedly mine is probably a non-standard case and it ties in with other things in my life.
Condolences on your loss.
Depends on how you define ‘cost’ I suppose, but seems like the trade off isn’t worth it for you, which is fair.
Some might value the perceived benefits much higher than you do.
What if the life I’m imagining I’m protecting is one where I have the option of choosing a platform/application that isn’t scraping the absolute dregs of the barrel to squeeze out that last bit of profit margin.
That’s a win win right?
The book is great as well, there is also a prequel book “The Boy On The Bridge”
Brazil (1985)
I don’t think it’s negative for people to be alienated from DeSantis. He’s a piece of shit.
Agreed and I’m also aware that that bias can creep in to how i present information but i think blatant attempts to try and alienate people (in general) isn’t a good approach, presenting facts and well reasoned points of view will allow others to draw their own conclusions.
I don’t know if this applies to everyone, but if i get the impression that someone is trying to sway me in any direction (outside of a context where that sort of behaviour is expected and accepted by both parties) then I’d be very unlikely to take their opinion at face value.
I’m not sure I understand your question. But this is the internet so I’ll answer anyway. I think bias against DeSantis is appropriate, especially in this community. But I didn’t think the article did it very well.
Agreed, it wasn’t a well written article, at least by my standards.
Since I was trying to contrast against the bias in the original article I still think it was appropriate.
Also agreed, i was mainly pointing out that by leaving out mention of the potential other type of bias it could lead someone to think it was done intentionally, which ties in nicely with what you wrote next.
I feel that way because it was so overt that I fear it would never be digested by anyone on the fence.
Agreed and i find this to be a common problem, someone with an what would otherwise be a reasonable take pollutes my opinion of it by presenting it in such a way that it makes them seem unreasonable, be that inflammatory language, explicit bias, blatant omissions etc.
I prefer news articles that help people understand others.
This is harder and harder to find, not to say that any news has ever been bias free but to me it’s become much harder to find anything approaching a well presented article without some sort of literary shenanigans being applied.
I think it did a reasonable job of responding by pointing out a bias that I also think is evident. There was a choice to use certain phrases in the way they were used.
I just think the level of bias in that direction isn’t as large as it seemed because he is a politician, speaking about a situation with politics in mind. As such , details that potentially add context to the politics of the situation are relevant, that’s not necessarily bias as much as relevant context.
I don’t personally think him being a failed presidential candidate has much bearing past the possible bitterness he might be bringing to proceedings but actively choosing to appear with what could be considered an extremist group, for me, absolutely speaks to political and personal character, for good or ill ( a negative to me personally ).
The additions only serve to further alienate the reader from DeSantis and DeSantis supporters. It’s clearly biased against him.
Potentially, but that doesn’t make them inherently bias, for some that probably looks like a show of power.
That you personally think it’s a negative speaks more to your own bias than the inclusion of the details. That goes for me as well.
Choosing not to include those details could just as easily be considered bias.
If a person can’t see how that article is biased it says a lot about them.
If you mean me specifically then I’d answer that I do in fact think there’s a bias, i wasn’t arguing for the absence of bias,i was arguing that the specific bias you mentioned wasn’t the only possible kind that should be considered and that in light of the additional kinds it might move the needle of where the bias might be falling.
I’m assuming (possibly incorrectly) that you think that the included details can only be taken negatively, what does that say about your own bias?
Leaving out details is also bias. Especially when those details are pertinent to the subject being reported on.
That he was talking about state policies could arguably be said to warrant including politics based details of the situation. Him being a failed presidential candidate and attending said event with a representatives of an anti-government extremist group would probably qualify for that.
The difference between:
Man speaks at length against restrictions to future meat-production quota’s
vs
Man known for previously running on a platform of meat-quota deregulation. speaks at length against restrictions to future meat-production quota’s, surrounded by meat industry lobbyists.
Yes, the second one sounds more negative, but that’s not necessarily bias.
“Treating them as legitimate” and “forceful removal” are very different concepts and the definition of “legitimate” is subjective in the extreme on the world stage.
Sanctions and penalties are within the remit of the EU, “liberation” is not , at least as far as I know.
Finally, a question, which other country could be considered “held captive by conservatives” with numerous deaths provably tried to said conservatives and also could be said to “difficult” to reason with?
Second, at least here in Germany Telegram has become the main platform for conspiracy nuts and antidemocratic organizations. Someone who is “very active” on Telegram is most certainly an idiot.
Bet the majority of them drive cars as well.
I don’t think there’s any data Microsoft can get through you using edge that they can’t also get just by controlling your OS
I’d put mid-level money on that not being true. There are a lot of things going on in a browser, a lot of which aren’t particularly easy to access from the outside.
Not to say it isn’t possible.
There are valid reasons to use windows and if you’ve gotta use it anyway they’ve already got your data from the start
To a degree yes, but assuming they aren’t pulling nefarious shit in the background, there are in theory many things you can turn off or somewhat neutralise using the options in the OS to reduce the level of data collection.
They are slowly removing those options but they still exist for now.
Again, i fully understand people not wanting to go to the trouble to achieve a goal they don’t care about, but that isn’t the same as there being nothing you can do if you wish to.
There shouldn’t be any of the Googled parts of Chrome in Edge, just as there aren’t any Googled parts of Chrome in stock Chromium.
There are at the very least googled parts of chromium in it though : https://github.com/ungoogled-software/ungoogled-chromium
Unless google have significantly changed the way they package and build chromium recently there are still google web service dependencies and i believe binary blobs (though they may have changed the closed source blob policy iirc)
Of course, you are now giving your data to Microsoft instead of Google, which isn’t really a win or a lose. If you’re not paying for the software, you’re either using FOSS, or the software is paid for by selling access to you and your computer.
Indeed
If you’re using windows you’re already giving Microsoft data so may as well
While technically correct, to me this sounds like “You haven’t managed to stop some of the tracking, why not just give them everything?” which is personally not my approach.
Not to say that my approach isn’t effort and is even effective, but I’d much rather limit the damage in the ways i can rather than give up entirely. I can see why someone wouldn’t want to put in that kind of effort though and i don’t fault them for it.
Edge uses chromium not chrome, I would hazard a guess there’s much less data harvesting going on in base chromium given it’s open source and people can see exactly what they collect
Open source yes, but not necessarily free from data-harvesting.
The fact that un-googled chromium (and others like it) exist implies that straight up chromium being open source isn’t a guarantee they aren’t doing consumer-hostile shit anyway.
Though, yes, it’s almost certainly less than full-fat chrome.
I’m having trouble parsing this so i might be commenting on something that isn’t there.
Current edge is a chrome re-skin with some addons, I’d put good money on it not being google free.
If you care about data going to nefarious places you probably shouldn’t be using either.
Isn’t the whole point of this article to point out that no, in fact, you won’t ?
Less volume perhaps, certainly less obvious, but not “without”.
To clarify , there is an aurora client for f-droid. https://gitlab.com/AuroraOSS/auroradroid
The OP mentions aurora store by name so they are probably not talking about the f-droid wrapper. Also if f-droid breaks rule 4 AuroraDroid almost certainly does.
Cost per GiB is higher and long term reliability is lower in most scenarios.
The failure scenarios for spinning rust tends to work better with large storage arrays as well.
Not all absolutes, but enough of them are true on a common enough basis that spending the extra on SSD’s isn’t usually worth it.
If you want some real in depth explanations there’s probably a datahoarder community somewhere or reddit if you are so inclined.
The only “legal” thing you can do
Are you suggesting that generation-specific vernacular is a sign of poor education?