evenwicht 2d ago • 100%
That would indeed be the practical answer assuming he has a credit card with those protections. Credit cards not issued in the US or UK often lack chargeback protections in non-fraud situations.
Note as well that even in the US the chargeback merely moves the money back to the consumer and does not affect legal obligations. If AXS were motivated, they could sue the customer in that case and likely point to a contract that indemnifies them from software defects and incompatibilities.
I think most banks have a threshold where they eat the loss. I did a chargeback once for around ~$20 or 30. Then I found out that the bank’s cost of investigating the chargeback exceeds something like $50, so the bank just takes the hit instead of the merchant. I found that a bit disturbing because a malicious or reckless merchant has no risk on small transactions. But in the case at hand for $200, the bank would likely clawback the money from AXS.
evenwicht 4d ago • 100%
!smartphone_required@lemmy.sdf.org captures these kinds of cases. @FoxyFerengi@lemm.ee, if you know of any situations where your prof faced difficulty for not having a smartphone, consider posting about it there.
evenwicht 7d ago • 100%
Ah, interesting point. I didn’t realise the devs were Russian. That might explain this issue as well:
https://github.com/osmandapp/OsmAnd/issues/15927
OSMand is so glitchy and crash prone it would be useful to know which features are more inclined to hog resources, since resource insufficiency seems to be the reason for crashes. Things like the animation boolean and Kalman filter. I’m not sure if I should avoid those features.
For one person it crashes on long routes. For me a long route is more likely to have crashes just because the app must run for longer. My workaround is to save every route as a track before starting, so every time it crashes I don’t have to wait to recalculate the route (but I have to keep my eyes on the screen).
OSMand used to only crash 1 or 2 times per trip. It was usable enough. Now recently something changed with my config somehow and it shows **extreme** detail no matter how zoomed out I am. Every tiny street is being rendered. This is killing the app. It crashes so chronically it’s unusable. Anyone know how to control this? In “configure map” I have disabled everything except cycling routes. The “details” shows 0/9, which apparently only configures objects, not street details. (edit) I think the “map magnifier” might be the issue. It was at 25% (the lowest), which I would intuitively think means less road detail. But it’s apparently counter-intuitive. I chose 100% and I seem to get less map detail -- which is what I need because the more detail, the more crashes. So I might have solved this.. need to experiment.
wdwnt.com
This is crazy. Disney is claiming that a wrongful death lawsuit cannot go forward (paraphrasing): “sorry, your husband signed up to a Disney+ trial a couple of years ago, hence they accepted T&Cs that clearly stated that any dispute about our products should go through arbitration rather than through courts”. Even if a consumer carefully reads the terms and conditions, how could they reasonably expect the ToS for a video game would affect the terms they are under at a Disney restaurant? That’s fucking nuts. Future parents: “sorry kids, you cannot play that video game because there is an arbitration clause and one day you might want to visit Disney’s amusement parks.” I’ve boycotted Disney for over a decade because of how conservative the corp is and how right-wing extremist they are with politics. IIRC Disney financed the campaign of a politician looking to eliminate background checks on firearms. Indeed, the company who entertains kids is happy to fight against basic gun control. So when Disney pulls a dick move like this arbitration clause it just reinforces the idea that boycotting Disney is the right move. (edit) wow the ups and downs of the votes are interesting. ATM 9 up & 9 down. Can’t help but wonder who are these anti-human people who are happy to lick the corporate boots of Disney.. capitalist fanatics disappointed that people would object to arbitration clauses perversely applied so broadly? I have to wonder if loyal Disney employees are following this thread.
evenwicht 2w ago • 100%
Thanks for the tip. The info would be gone now but I’ll try that next time it happens.
This is what my fetchmail log looks like today (UIDs and domains obfuscated): ``` fetchmail: starting fetchmail 6.4.37 daemon fetchmail: Server certificate verification error: self-signed certificate in certificate chain fetchmail: Missing trust anchor certificate: /C=US/O=Let's Encrypt/CN=R3 fetchmail: This could mean that the root CA's signing certificate is not in the trusted CA certificate location, or that c_rehash needs to be run on the certificate directory. For details, please see the documentation of --sslcertpath and --sslcertfile in the manual page. See README.SSL for details. fetchmail: OpenSSL reported: error:0A000086:SSL routines::certificate verify failed fetchmail: server4.com: SSL connection failed. fetchmail: socket error while fetching from user4@server4.com@server4.com fetchmail: Query status=2 (SOCKET) fetchmail: Server certificate verification error: self-signed certificate in certificate chain fetchmail: Missing trust anchor certificate: /C=US/O=Let's Encrypt/CN=R3 fetchmail: This could mean that the root CA's signing certificate is not in the trusted CA certificate location, or that c_rehash needs to be run on the certificate directory. For details, please see the documentation of --sslcertpath and --sslcertfile in the manual page. See README.SSL for details. fetchmail: OpenSSL reported: error:0A000086:SSL routines::certificate verify failed fetchmail: server3.com: SSL connection failed. fetchmail: socket error while fetching from user3@server3.com@server3.com fetchmail: Server certificate verification error: self-signed certificate in certificate chain fetchmail: Missing trust anchor certificate: /C=US/O=Let's Encrypt/CN=R3 fetchmail: This could mean that the root CA's signing certificate is not in the trusted CA certificate location, or that c_rehash needs to be run on the certificate directory. For details, please see the documentation of --sslcertpath and --sslcertfile in the manual page. See README.SSL for details. fetchmail: OpenSSL reported: error:0A000086:SSL routines::certificate verify failed fetchmail: server2.com: SSL connection failed. fetchmail: socket error while fetching from user2@server2.com@server2.com fetchmail: Query status=2 (SOCKET) fetchmail: Server certificate verification error: self-signed certificate in certificate chain fetchmail: Missing trust anchor certificate: /C=US/O=Let's Encrypt/CN=R3 fetchmail: This could mean that the root CA's signing certificate is not in the trusted CA certificate location, or that c_rehash needs to be run on the certificate directory. For details, please see the documentation of --sslcertpath and --sslcertfile in the manual page. See README.SSL for details. fetchmail: OpenSSL reported: error:0A000086:SSL routines::certificate verify failed fetchmail: server1.com: SSL connection failed. fetchmail: socket error while fetching from user1@server1.com@server1.com fetchmail: Query status=2 (SOCKET) ``` In principle I should be able to report the exit node somewhere. But I don’t even know how I can determine which exit node is the culprit. Running `nyx` just shows some of the circuits (guard, middle, exit) but I seem to have no way of associating those circuits with fetchmail’s traffic. Anyone know how to track which exit node is used for various sessions? I could of course pin an exit node to a domain, then I would know it, but that loses the benefit of random selection.
evenwicht 3w ago • 100%
It’s not a balance. About half the web still works from the Tor network. Also, Tor is not a DDoS threat to clearnet sites. There are only a few hundred exit nodes which work as a bottleneck to such attacks. The Tor network itself would suffer before a moderately competent target would fall.
A site calling itself "open data” should obviously be among the half of the world’s websites which function for Tor visitors.
And the fact that it cannot function even as an archive.org mirror, I must say it takes a special talent to be so incapable of being accessible. Most websites are reachable as archives.
And if you try to visit the archive¹, that’s also fucked. Not sure who these people are.. maybe they are actually watchdogs in opposition to open data. ¹ https://web.archive.org/web/20240925081816/https://www.opendatawatch.com/
evenwicht 3w ago • 100%
Yes, but a scam is normally something that baits someone into a situation they fall prey to. The US credit system is certainly that, but it also exploits unwilling people who have no intent of taking the bait. That is, we cannot opt-out of the credit bureaus collecting data on us even if we try.
evenwicht 4w ago • 100%
I figured the power consumption of multiple parallel decodings would increase but it would be negligable if limited to occur during channel browsing. If you settle on a signal for 2 min, it could revert to 1 channel.
A more crude improvement would be trivial: simply continue playing the previous buffer during the 3 second gap, but update the display instantly to show the user that their command was received and acted on. The 3 second gap could also be a fade-out to give an audible signal that the channel change command is in motion. The linux app “Clementine” does some of this. When you click the stop button, it does not stop the music instantly but does a fade out.
DJs sometimes have to switch to something else quickly with no time to beat match. It’s not a good situation but their method of choice seems to be a rapid cross-fade, as opposed to a sharp and sudden discrete switch. That slight smoothness helps. With a small buffer the two channels could even slow one channel and speed up the other to do an automatic beat match and cross-fade a bit more smoothly. I would not be surprised if there were some FOSS libs that already provide this sort of thing.
(edit) I should note as well that there is one station that has a very low level so you have to double the volume to match any other station. A device that fades during transitions could normalize the level differences without the user even knowing the differences are there.
My DAB+ radio also has an FM function. It stores a favorite set of channels for DAB and a separate memory store for FM. When cycling through the DAB presets, there is a ~3 or so second delay for it to tune and decode. With the FM mode there is no delay. Is my particular model just slow with decoding the first sound byte or is this an inherent DAB shortcoming? I imagine a well designed DAB radio could theoretically tune the next 2 or 3 presets in sequence simultaneously in parallel so you could avoid the channel changing delay. Has anything like that been implemented? What about a device that pairs FM to DAB? Some radio stations have both an FM and a DAB transmission. So in principle I would want the device to be aware of the dupes. From there, I should be able to flip through the FM stations and once I settle on a station push a single button to switch over to the DAB signal. It could even deliberately play the FM signal for 4 sec. longer and quickly cross-fade in the DAB signal. Any hardware on the market doing this sort of thing?
evenwicht 4w ago • 100%
I’m not sure what data breaches you’re referring to. The data that makes it into the credit file is not generally due to a breach¹. Every “member” of a credit bureau is free to share info with the credit bureau. Those members (which are generally banks, insurance companies, creditors) usually put in their privacy policy some vague verbiage about sharing with credit bureaus.
If you mean breaches of the credit bureau, like what happened with Equifax, I don’t believe a US court would view the breach itself as quantifiable provable damage to every consumer. I think there would only be (court-recognized) damage if the data were actually exploited in a way that costs you money.
¹ Although I say unlawfully exfiltrated data would unlikely make it onto the credit report, I cannot know for certain precisely because the credit bureau conceals the info source. That’s the reason we would want the law enforced. If CRAs were to share the source info, we would be able to separate the sources we have agreements with from those we don’t, and possibly chase up the sources we did not authorize to investigate where the data came from, which very well could have a supply chain that leads to the black market, a ransom attack, etc.
evenwicht 4w ago • 100%
Yeah, I could get some counciling for that problem. Then the invoice from the counselor would be evidence for court. I should probably also buy a CD by Mika, with that song “Relax, Take it Easy” as a destressor. Then bring that receipt to court as well.
The FCRA requires credit bureaus to disclose to consumers the identity of the sources of information in your credit file. Yet if you look at your credit report from any of the 3 major giants (TRU, EFX, EXPN), they list out all addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses with no indication of who fed them that info. If you request that info, they ignore or refuse. The penalty for FCRA violations in that section is $1k. So you might think: “how cool is that? I can simply sue all three credit bureaus for $1k each”. It should work like that, but doesn’t. IIRC, it was a lawyer for a credit bureau who told me in so many words: case law shows that you must incur damages in this particular case. So if you can prove damages, then you can claim $1k (even if the actual damages are $1). But how do you even prove $1 in damages? I have some ideas but generally this is such an uphill battle that credit bureaus can simply bluntly ignore the law. Which is what they do. It’s a good demonstration of how US corporations will plainly break laws that are unenforceable.
evenwicht 4w ago • 100%
update: FWIW, they did not comply to the written request.
I think the law only requires them to comply with opt-out requests when consumers follow the opt-out procedure. Which in my case is a problem.
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/22571649 > According to 15 U.S.C. 7704 §5(a)(5): > > > INCLUSION OF IDENTIFIER, OPT-OUT, AND PHYSICAL ADDRESS IN COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL.— > > > > (A) It is unlawful for any person to initiate the transmission of any commercial electronic mail message to a protected computer unless the message provides— > > > > (i) clear and conspicuous identification that the message is an advertisement or solicitation; > > (ii) clear and conspicuous notice of the opportunity under paragraph (3) to decline to receive further commercial electronic mail messages from the sender; and > > (iii) a valid physical postal address of the sender. > > When my text-based mail client receives an HTML-only email message, it tries to render the HTML as text. It’s sometimes a jumbled up unreadable heap of garbage because the HTML is malformed and relies on a forgiving/tolerant rendering engine. Even when the HTML is proper and standards compliant, links are not exposed to text rendered. E.g. a msg will say “to unsubscribe and stop receiving emails, update preferences here.” > > Where is “here”? That is just raw text. Sure, an advanced user can do a number of things to dig up that link. But I doubt that would pass the legal standard of “clear and conspicuous”. > > Anyone have confidence either way whether HTML-only spam is legally actionable on this basis?
According to 15 U.S.C. 7704 §5(a)(5): > INCLUSION OF IDENTIFIER, OPT-OUT, AND PHYSICAL ADDRESS IN COMMERCIAL ELECTRONIC MAIL.— > > (A) It is unlawful for any person to initiate the transmission of any commercial electronic mail message to a protected computer unless the message provides— > > (i) clear and conspicuous identification that the message is an advertisement or solicitation; > (ii) clear and conspicuous notice of the opportunity under paragraph (3) to decline to receive further commercial electronic mail messages from the sender; and > (iii) a valid physical postal address of the sender. When my text-based mail client receives an HTML-only email message, it tries to render the HTML as text. It’s sometimes a jumbled up unreadable heap of garbage because the HTML is malformed and relies on a forgiving/tolerant rendering engine. Even when the HTML is well formed, hyperlinks are not exposed in the text rendered. E.g. a msg will say “to unsubscribe and stop receiving emails, update preferences here.” Where is “here”? That is just raw text to me. Sure, an advanced user can do a number of things to dig up that link. But I doubt that would pass the legal standard of “clear and conspicuous”. Anyone have confidence either way whether HTML-only spam is legally actionable on this basis? (update) I should mention the most annoying offenders-- corporate senders (e.g. banks) that attach a plaintext MIME part, but then the motherfuckers use it to just say (in so many words) “You need to update your software”. This makes it extra difficult to see the content of the message because the text mail client of course shows the text MIME part by default.
Some banks have started demanding proof of address when they realize that the address they have on file is “commercial”, e.g. like a UPS Store PMB type of address. How would this play out in court? The law¹ states: > “(i) Customer information required—(A) In general. The CIP must contain procedures for opening an account that specify the identifying information that will be obtained from each customer. Except as permitted by paragraphs (b)(2)(i)(B) and (C) of this section, the bank must obtain, at a minimum,the following information from the customer prior to opening an account: > 1. Name; > 1. Date of birth, for an individual; > 1. Address, which shall be: > (i) For an individual, a residential or **business street address**; > (ii) For an individual who does not have a residential or business street address, an Army Post Office (APO) or Fleet Post Office (FPO) box number, or the residential or business street address of next of kin or of another contact individual; or … > 1. Identification number, which shall be: … (emphasis mine) Banks seem to be over-reacting to law that is more lenient than what banks are interpreting. Not only are business addresses allowed, but a bank customer can even supply someone else’s address. The law also seems to distinguish between old customers and new. Yet out of the blue banks are harrassing customers who have had an account for years. They have a gov-issued ID doc and SSN, yet suddenly the banks get anal and persnickety about the address to the extreme of freezing people’s accounts as databases grow (DBs that track the zoning an address is in). Has this been challenged in court? It’s clear from the linked thread that customers either dance for the banks or get their accounts frozen. It could be hard to challenge in court since banks can demand whatever info they want even if not required by law. But if they suddenly close an account that has been established, that could cause damages to the customer. One interpretation is that legislators intended the business address to be that of the customer’s workplace. But the law does not seem to specify that. ¹ 31 C.F.R. § 103.121
evenwicht 2mo ago • 100%
Accounts and digital assets seem directly applicable to assets held.
And? Holding assets does not in itself trigger tax. Esp. how they are held. Whether your $100 is in a banknote or $100 in gold coins or Second Life game money, or $100 in a cheese wheel, in the absence of a transaction there’s no tax to speak of.
W.r.t accounts, it’s just foriegn accounts they want to know about, not domestic accounts. Walk me through the tax difference between the two (not interest, not cap gains, just having the account).
Occupation sounds like it could have to do with tax credits, if you’re in something that’s subsidised.
If that’s the case, that’s declared on a form that actually has effects on figures, which is not what I’m talking about. That would be an enumeration with a code that discretely assigns an activity from a list to an outcome. If you look at the signature box of the 1040, that’s just a freehand field. You can write “contractor” there or any number of vague things without affecting subsidies. I’m specifically talking about information that does not affect the figures.
Residence is weird but in the opposite way, because usually countries don’t tax residents abroad. 'Murca is the exception there, although I don’t know all the exact details.
Residence indeed affects the figures (whether you are inside or outside the US), but that’s already accounted for by the forms being submitted and the data on them. When a form arbitarily has a field for country of residence and that field in no way affects the figures, it’s extraneous info. Just a data collection that makes no difference to the bottom line. I just had a look at the 1116 form. Whether you write USA or Japan on the residence field makes no difference whatsoever in the in the calculation. You can write anything on that line and it does not change the calculation AFAICT.
evenwicht 2mo ago • 14%
Off the top of my head I recall questions about the taxpayer’s occupation, whether foreign bank accounts are held by the taxpayer and whether any digital assets are held. I think some forms (1116, perhaps) ask for country of residence but IIRC this has no influence on the calculations.
Some tax forms ask information that seems to have no effect on the bottom line. No matter how you answer the question, your tax bill is the same either way. In Europe, this sort of thing would violate the data minimization principle of the GDPR. So the question is, what happens to people who either leave the intrusive fields blank, or they give bogus info? I’ve heard that tax penalties are generally `a constant` × `the amount of underpayment`. If underpayment is zero then so is the penalty, correct?
evenwicht 3mo ago • 100%
It’s not a binary statement. it’s a measure of proportions. So my statement was factually correct. Cloudflared banks are quite rare in Western Europe, for example. I actually cannot think of any off the top of my head. Step into the US, and credit unions are mostly pawned by Cloudflare. It’s a shit show. Hard to find non-Cloudflared CUs, which is an artifact of shoestring-budget funding.
I heard someone talking about a European bank that was considering using Cloudflare and it was met with protest. The bank backed off the idea. In the US people don’t give a shit.. they don’t even notice. There’s a bit more blind trust for big corps.
evenwicht 3mo ago • 50%
Cloudflare is mostly a US thing. Banks outside the US are a bit more competent¹ in this regard. But there are thousands of banks and CUs in the US and I only need one in the end. The problem is the Discover network narrows the choice down to a tiny fraction of banks. So I’m looking for an intersection of two small sets. If I can find one that functions offline and does not charge extra for paper statements that might be good enough.
¹ (edit) Guess I should clarify. A website that has good security does not rely on the crude practice of DoSing based on IP reputation. If an admin believes they can protect a website by using arbitrary guesswork about IP addresses, that’s alarming because the kind of criminals that should be in their threat models as threat agents would be in control of botnets that give them countless normal residential IPs. Use of Cloudflare is a sign of a poorly secured bank because it suggests they don’t have good enough security to protect from malicious traffic regardless of IP address. Also: not my problem. As a non-clearnet user, I am nixing banks that cannot serve me. That means they must either serve Tor users or they must work offline.
I hope this question doesn’t piss anyone off.. it was censored on lemmy.ml. I’m looking for 3rd-party banks that issue debit cards for use on the Discover / Diner’s Club network. It’s quite rare. Visa, Mastercard, and AmEx are more common and easier to find, but I have a number of objections to those companies. Discover is a clear lesser of evils. This is what I know from past and present searches: * (FL) https://cadencebank.com ← Cloudflare, not interested * (GA) colony.bank ← dead (or blocks Tor) * (IL) https://www.oldsecond.com ← used to have a Discover debit card but no longer. Rumored to have a Discover credit card but I don’t see mention of it on their website * (KY) cfsbky.com ← Cloudflare, not interested * (MD) https://www.oldlinebank.com ← dead (or blocks Tor) * (PA) jbt.bank ← Sucuri, not interested * (TX) thebankandtrust.com ← Cloudflare, not interested * (TX) www.extracobanks.com ← blocks Tor * (WI) https://www.guardiancu.org ← dead (or blocks Tor) If I overlooked any please mention it (even if it’s Cloudflare, just to know the options). It’s a paltry list considering there are thousands of banks and credit unions nationwide.. and I only found 9. True Value hardware used to have a Discover credit card but discontinued that in 2020. There’s some chatter that Capital One may acquire Discovercard. It will be a shame if that happens, but the upside could be that more 3rd-party Discovercards emerge from it.
evenwicht 3mo ago • 100%
I asked them in writing. It will be interesting to see if they comply.
To be clear, the purpose of the post is to understand the law (the forum being !law_us) because I want to fix this problem for everyone not just myself. I believe these digital rights abuses are so rampant because so few people step up to the plate to fix the problem for everyone. Most people just pragmatically fix the problem for themselves and move on. I want to understand the law to get an idea of the legal actionablity so that I can work out whether I have a pathway to force the CU to make their workflow with all customers legally compliant -- which would be a process I can recycle with other similar data abusers (other banks).
I blame Taylor Swift, telling people to “shake, shake, shake it off…” instead of fighting back.
evenwicht 3mo ago • 100%
When I visit the opt-out website and it simply prints on the screen “403 Forbidden”. No reason given¹. No recourse given. That is not giving opportunity. When they conceal the URL from some demographics of people, that is also withholding an opportunity to opt-out.
Let’s suppose the opt-out procedure were completely disclosed and fully transparent. Suppose they sent a properly formed email that reveals the opt-out procedure to everyone (inluding those with text-based MUAs). If they were to outright state something like “you must use our preferred network (clearnet, not Tor, not VPN, not CGNAT), you must share your personal IP address with a 3rd party with no expectation of privacy, and you must solve a series of CAPTCHA tests after traversing our cookie wall.” That would still be giving exclusive opportunity. IOW, not everyone has opportunity, just those who are both willing and able to dance for them. When strings are attached to the opt-out, that “opportunity” is conditional. I believe the law would have to specifically state that conditional opportunity is permissable. Otherwise the only valid interpretation of law (IIUC) is that the opportunity be unconditional. Hence my question.
If you believe arbitrarily conditional opportunity is lawful, what’s your limit? What if the procedure requires driving to a remote location, crossing a river with crockodiles, and running through an area with snakes and scorpions in order to reach a form (written in a blend of Mandarin and Apache) that you must fill out requesting an opt-out? Would you still regard that as giving opportunity?
¹ When I say that they are blocking people who are on the Tor network, that is merely my guess. A “403 Forbidden” can manifest for many reasons and in this case the site does not state why a 403 was pushed. But regardless of their undisclosed reason, when they lock someone out of their gate, it is of course denying opportunity to opt out.
My credit union has been spamming me for years. As the volume of their bulk junk mail increases, I’m looking for a way out. Their email is HTML-only. So my text mail client only renders the raw text “To unsubscribe and stop receiving emails click here”. And “here” is obviously just text because it’s a text terminal. Is that legal? Suppose it is. So I dissect the HTML and fish out the link from a heap of garbage. The link does not go to the credit union’s website (if it did, that would be a non-starter anyway because I canceled my web account when they started blocking Tor). The link goes to a 3rd party site which also blocks Tor. So apparently as a precondition to opting out of spam I must share my personal IP address with a 3rd party agent of spam. Perhaps I can play whack-a-mole with a series of VPNs but I’m not interested. I just want to know if the opt-out procedure can legally be exclusive in this way. Can a legal challenge be mounted that forces them to provide an opt-out mechanism that’s inclusive? The legal text is this: > (ii) clear and conspicuous notice of the opportunity under paragraph (3) to decline to receive further commercial electronic mail messages from the sender; I don’t know the legal meaning of “clear and conspicuous”, so I’m not sure if nesting it in HTML satisfies that requirement. But it’s strange that they must merely give notice of the ***opportunity*** to opt-out, apparently without actually giving the opportunity to opt-out (just notice thereof IIUC).
evenwicht 3mo ago • 42%
Javascript clients aren’t good for that. Lemmy/kbin/mastodon nodes vanish all the time without warning. All your posts: gone. JS has no practical way to integrate local storage, thus no historic content when a server vanishes.
Not to mention as well that web UIs tend to force you to use a mouse, which is a slower workflow.
Has anyone found a Debian client for Lemmy? I’m really surprised nothing exists yet and wonder if my search skills are just lacking. This is what found: * [lemoa](https://github.com/lemmygtk/lemoa) is non-Debian, and dying * neonmodem is non-Debian, and crashes * nnreddit is non-Debian, and only rumored to be getting ported to activitypub; the repo for that project is a broken website for me (Non-debian just means they are not in the Debian repos, not that they don’t work on Debian).
Just wondering if anyone has managed access Lemmy from emacs in any way. Theoretically, this may be feasible: emacs (gnus) → nnreddit → lemmy But I’ve not heard anything solid about whether nnreddit has been adapted to interface with a lemmy server. This bug report has been open for the past year: https://github.com/dickmao/nnreddit/issues/90 OTOH, the project moved to a website that’s broken (at least, for me it’s broken).
evenwicht 3mo ago • 100%
I refuse to do online banking entirely because the websites have become so shitty. And I will not touch non-FOSS smartphone apps. So I only bank offline. And yes, I get screwed because most banks charge a fee for paper statements. So my options are very limited.
If you are offline you can probably still invest and have savings (in the US, not sure about Europe) but I would expect that to be quite costly. I think manual trades with human involvement are like $20 per trade or so in the US. That’s really the most fucked up part of this. If offline consumers had equal rights in terms of pricing, it would be fair enough and the online options would have pressure to be less shitty.
evenwicht 3mo ago • 100%
I think it’s hard to find a bank that doesn’t require a phone.
It really depends on where you are. The US has over 6000 banks to choose from, so the highly competitive region somewhat helps. You probably could find some small town rural banks in the US that will open an account without a phone number. In some parts of Europe they insist on having a mobile number. But what some people do not know is EU banks cannot refuse a request for a “basic” bank account. I don’t think all banks offer basic accounts, but when they do, the application form does not even have a field for a phone number. Just name, address, and date of birth.