Post @post@qoto.org

@johncarlosbaez

Is it related to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=851U557j6HE ?

@futurebird

Please no, don't make such a rhetorical comparison to spam (or even DDOS, come on...).

Freedom of speech is and has always been about legitimacy of every idea while only actions can be crimes that can be prosecuted by law and with the guarantees it poses.

Carrying out any act, even if only intimidating, towards those who have only expressed the wrong idea for you, is already a violation of freedom of speech.

@naciketas@mastodon.uno @cicciocappuccio

1. Dipende dalla definizione che dai di vaccino. Se per essere un vaccino deve prevenire la malattia allora non lo sono e non sono stati testati per questo. Mettiti l'anima in pace che questa è la definizione di vaccino più comune, per di più cambiata dal CDC americano all'ultimo per far rientrare questi anticovid.

2. Siero non è il termine tecnico corretto, è vero, ma che siano in sperimentazione sì. Come è vero che l'AIFA ha ammesso di non essere in possesso dei rapporti di efficacia e sicurezza (PSUR) richiesti per legge per l'immissione in commercio di un farmaco. A fine gennaio ci sarà la prima udienza su questo.

3. Il resto della risposta della Pfizer non è rilevante, perché anche se hanno avuto fretta nel metterli in commercio, così come hanno testato l'efficacia contro la forma grave, avrebbero dovuto iniziare la speriementazione sul contagio e oggi dopo due anni dovremmo poter avere i risultati. Ma che siano inutili nel prevenire il contagio è sotto gli occhi di tutti.

4. Esistono eccome e ne sono testimoni i medici che li hanno adoperati fin dall'inizio, perché potrà pur essere sconosciuto il virus ma i sintomi sono noti e affrontabili.

5. Guardati un documentario come "Invisibili" e vai a dire a quelle persone che sono una bufala.

@naciketas@mastodon.uno @cicciocappuccio

Il manifesto che hai preso in giro afferma che quei prodotti non sono mai stati testati nella loro efficacia nel prevenire il contagio, ma solo nel prevenire l'aggravamento della malattia, quindi si tratta di una scelta personale se usufruirne o meno.

Quindi su che base si sono istituiti Green Pass e obblighi? Forse è stato possibile perché alle persone è stato fatto credere che prevenissero il contagio?

Se è così allora con che coraggio quel sito se ne esce con un "si sapeva già"? Evidentemente se si sono accettati Green Pass e obblighi non è così noto a tutti. Da qui la necessità di informare anche con manifesti.

@naciketas@mastodon.uno @cicciocappuccio

Ebbene?

@Zach777 @cassidyjames @wizzwizz4 @didek

I'm not saying they are useless, but this particular sentence puzzled me:

> I’m genuinely happy to see traffic encrypted through a VPN becoming more the default

@didek @SaturniusMons @cassidyjames @wizzwizz4

Who said everyone should use Tor always?

I think there is some confusion here on what the threats to security and privacy are and what a VPN provides.

@cassidyjames @wizzwizz4 @didek

I'm sorry but this has nothing to do with VPN vs ISP, you just seem to have a bias or fell for some marketing campaign with the aim of selling a useless service.

The mention of an open source client was particularly unrelated and it seems thrown there like a buzzword.

If you really need to hide the domains (example.com) you are connecting to from your ISP, use Tor.

@wizzwizz4 @cassidyjames @didek

This is my understanding too, and I was curious to know why OP said he is happy that more people encrypt more traffic through a VPN service.

If there isn't something I'm missing, I think that sentence could mislead people into thinking a VPN provider is better for privacy and security.

@cassidyjames @didek

Your traffic is encrypted, what's the difference between letting your ISP know the domains you connect too Vs letting the VPN provider have the same information?

@cassidyjames

Why are you happy to see more traffic encrypted through VPN? How is it different from encrypted traffic through ISP directly?

@evan @elipariser @vanderwal

This is how it works with Telegram public channels (one-to-many), the ones with many followers have ads displayed as messages and the owner can remove them for all followers by paying or each user can hide for themselves ads from any channel again by paying.

@filippo

In fact Mastodon has been successful because it focused more on UI/UX than GNU Social etc, for sure.

But I am still convinced that making people aware is the only way to establish a perpetual virtuous circle.

@boris @ednico

Not sure of what you mean, but even though it currently has rough edges, Logseq publishing feature is meant to ship the whole Logseq that runs entirely in the browser: it loads a DB, read data from it and update the content of the page accordingly. This enables feature like search and queries being evaluated live.

If you are looking for exporting content as many HTML pages and a bit of JavaScript, that would be a totally different thing, perhaps desirable for some use cases, but it would be a huge effort.

At the moment there are plugins to export content to other platforms like Hugo, maybe this approach could be gradually improved by supporting more and more Logseq features and plugins without Logseq core.

@daviddelven @andric

Of course Logseq is not supposed to be used only with Datalog by design: that is just an additional feature for more advanced users (and indeed they are called "Advanced Queries").

There are already Simple Queries but they plan to ship a graphical Query Builder.

There is a huge difference in laying solid foundations for a highly flexible *tool* and build a *product* around a good intuition or two.

I definitely see Logseq shipping a Query Builder and other features by Tana in some months, while I can't say the same with Tana becoming FOSS and local or even just supporting Markdown, PDF annotations, whiteboards, plugins etc.

@daviddelven @andric

I prefer Logseq, Free and Open Source Software, open formats and protocols, local files and offline-first, especially when it comes to personal data.

I consider Tana Inc. as an unofficial R&D department and Tana as a nice experiment but nothing too serious :-)

@filippo

Google and other corporations develop standards everyone can adopt, the Web ones for example, so this model is feasible.

But for other things they preferred to build silos and remove protocols they used to support. I don't pretend they reimplement every new feature by extending the standard first, but at least keep what was working, like simple plain text messages in XMPP.

Not to mention what Google did with RSS: what Google News provides today is anything that a RSS reader can't do.

They do what suits them like anyone else, the problem is when they have so much power that the user of the service has no more way to protest, for example by switching to the competition.

They are welcome to join the Fediverse, but people should take the chance to move away from them more easily because the Extinguish phase would eventually arrive for everyone.

@filippo

What if it happens like with Google and Facebook with XMPP?