!business@lemmy.world

Yes, this is the way.

Sure.

You might want to subscribe to !newcommunities@lemmy.world, and browse here once in a while: https://lemmyverse.net/communities

related: !sustainabletech@lemmy.sdf.org

I don’t follow Meta services, but for the record, I think you’re talking about the EU Digital Markets Act and its interoperability requirements of gatekeepers.

https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/gatekeepers_en

https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/questions-and-answers/interoperability_en

A good tool improves the way you work. A great tool improves the way you think.

Do these accept cash, or only ATM cards? (The latter would link your transaction to your bank account, of course.)

What do they give? A printout of a wallet address?

Someone with undetermined/unknowable gender would use the pronouns they/them, never he/him.

We’re not discussing what someone would use for themselves. We are discussing what someone would use when writing about a hypothetical person.

If you believe that he or him would never be used in this case, then I suggest you do some research on the history of language.

Edit to clarify: And by history, I include recent history, meaning usage by people alive today, who learned it in school not terribly long ago.

Either a male person or a hypothetical person whose gender is unknowable.

None of what you claim was done in the document being discussed.

It isn’t a fucking “convention” to push women down

No, but choosing either the male or female pronoun when writing about a hypothetical person has been the convention for a long time, and using the male one has been the usual default for far longer than any of us has been alive. It’s not to push women down; it’s a grammar compromise, and is not exclusive English.

You are misunderstanding the language as it was used, and you have jumped to a false conclusion that seems to make you so angry that you think it’s okay to publicly vilify someone… for your own mistake.

I hope things get better for you.

Good day.

Certain forms of singular they are old, but the drive to make it the general convention when referring to a hypothetical person is new.

“Personal politics” is a vague phrase that generally just means someone’s views and priorities. There is nothing pejorative about it, nor in the way he used it.

In other words, Andreas insists the OS developer be referred to as “he/him” instead of not assuming gender.

The build instructions in question follow English language conventions that have existed for hundreds of years (and are shared by more than few other languages). All he did was decline someone’s proposed change that would have applied a very new convention regarding pronouns for a hypothetical person. This is not the same as insisting that anyone refer to anyone else in a particular way.

It’s also not unreasonable. We can ask people to adopt new conventions, but we don’t get to expect or demand it.

Change to a language takes time.

It’s textbook misogyny.

No, it is not.

I followed the links to see what he actually wrote. There’s nothing transphobic or misogynistic about it.

If you are referring to some other incident, then please link it so we can see for ourselves.

Is an archive of their repair manuals available for download? Would you mind sharing the link?

I think you mean across the internet, but I get your point. You might want to state that in your post.

Its file sharing feature works between any supported devices, including phone-to-phone, and yes, it is intended for connections across a local network.

Why go through someone’s service when you could go direct?

https://kdeconnect.kde.org/download.html

[Citations needed] or it didn’t happen.

I think this mindset is naïve and unrealistic.

People were saying the same thing for decades in response to a small minority warning about government surveillance, often dismissing them with labels like “paranoid”. Eventually, Snowden came along and produced the citations, at extreme risk to himself and his loved ones. It’s an anomaly that they were ever revealed at all.

History is replete with examples of bad stuff going on for ages before irrefutable evidence of it became widely known. In general, if something can be abused to someone’s advantage, it will be, and likely already is.

There’s precious little extra information that a “nefarious” instance can harvest that any basic web scrapper can’t.

You have a point there, but consider also that effective web scraping uses significantly more resources than having the data you want handed to you. Monitoring Lemmy through federation would be much more efficient.

IMHO, this community should be about technology. Novel inventions. Interesting or creative applications. Discoveries. Dangers, advances, impacts, experiments, tutorials, etc.

Instead, it’s overrun with stock market and business news having no more to do with technology than CEOs of wood pulp factories have to do with literature.

I wish Rule 2 was phrased in a way that clearly excludes the latter, and enforced.