Skip to content

Samsung phones can survive twice as many charges as Pixel and iPhone, according to EU data

Technology
125 84 2
  • Session Messenger

    Technology technology
    8
    2
    15 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    26 Aufrufe
    S
    I think it was a great idea, but poorly executed. I prefer using simpleX, personally.
  • 40 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    1 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • 6 Stimmen
    1 Beiträge
    2 Aufrufe
    Niemand hat geantwortet
  • Using Signal groups for activism

    Technology technology
    37
    1
    204 Stimmen
    37 Beiträge
    128 Aufrufe
    ulrich@feddit.orgU
    You're using a messaging app that was built with the express intent of being private and encrypted. Yes. You're asking why you can't have a right to privacy when you use your real name as your display handle in order to hide your phone number. I didn't ask anything. I stated it definitively. If you then use personal details as your screen name, you can't get mad at the app for not hiding your personal details. I've already explained this. I am not mad. I am telling you why it's a bad product for activism. Chatting with your friends and clients isn't what this app is for. That's...exactly what it's for. And I don't know where you got the idea that it's not. It's absurd. Certainly Snowden never said anything of the sort. Signal themselves never said anything of the sort. There are other apps for that. Of course there are. They're varying degrees of not private, secure, or easy to use.
  • 48 Stimmen
    19 Beiträge
    45 Aufrufe
    mrjgyfly@lemmy.worldM
    Does that run the risk of leading to a future collapse of certain businesses, especially if their expenses remain consistently astronomical like OpenAI? Please note I don’t actually know—not trying to be cheeky with this question. Genuinely curious.
  • autofocus glasses

    Technology technology
    53
    1
    126 Stimmen
    53 Beiträge
    58 Aufrufe
    M
    Hm. Checking my glasses I think there is something on the top too. I can see distance ever so slightly clearer looking out the top. If I remember right, I have a minus .25 in one eye. Always been told it didn't need correction, but maybe it is in this pair. I should go get some off the shelf progressive readers and try those.
  • 462 Stimmen
    94 Beiträge
    138 Aufrufe
    L
    Make them publishers or whatever is required to have it be a legal requirement, have them ban people who share false information. The law doesn't magically make open discussions not open. By design, social media is open. If discussion from the public is closed, then it's no longer social media. ban people who share false information Banning people doesn't stop falsehoods. It's a broken solution promoting a false assurance. Authorities are still fallible & risk banning over unpopular/debatable expressions that may turn out true. There was unpopular dissent over covid lockdown policies in the US despite some dramatic differences with EU policies. Pro-palestinian protests get cracked down. Authorities are vulnerable to biases & swayed. Moreover, when people can just share their falsehoods offline, attempting to ban them online is hard to justify. If print media, through its decline, is being held legally responsible Print media is a controlled medium that controls it writers & approves everything before printing. It has a prepared, coordinated message. They can & do print books full of falsehoods if they want. Social media is open communication where anyone in the entire public can freely post anything before it is revoked. They aren't claiming to spread the truth, merely to enable communication.
  • @chrlschn - Beware the Complexity Merchants

    Technology technology
    6
    1
    57 Stimmen
    6 Beiträge
    26 Aufrufe
    S
    I'm a big fan of the manta "Make your designs as simple as possible and no simpler". Pointless complexity drives me nuts, but others take it too far and remove functionality by making things too minimal. It doesn't help that a lot of businesses optimize for people who make changes, so the positive feedback loop is change for the sake of change rather than improving the product.