Tobias Frisch

@justaguylinux@fosstodon.org I think it would be better if more people would start self-hosting their own git servers and we could have some sort of federalized platform connecting them. So we wouldn't have this central point of failure. Codeberg is great but it does not seem to be a proper solution long term.

@guenther@chaos.social @VQuaschning@mastodon.green War auch mein Gedanke... so schiefe Vergleiche helfen doch niemandem.

@guenther@chaos.social @VQuaschning@mastodon.green Würde sagen, das passiert wenn man irgendwann zu aktivistisch postet. Ich fände ja viel relevanter bei E-Autos, dass man die Energiequelle freier wählen kann. Man kann die Erzeugung tendenziell weiter optimieren und den Wirkungsgrad verbessern. Die Erzeugung kann relativ autark und dezentral passieren. Der Vergleich hier ist einfach nur Ragebait. Würde sagen, für Twitter reicht's...

@joeld @signalapp You could try Flare which is using a reimplementation of the Signal protocol in Rust. It's compatible with the official Signal servers though. https://flathub.org/en/apps/de.schmidhuberj.Flare

@bassjobsen@mastodon.nl @cwebber@social.coop It's a fundamental flaw of federalized protocols that users won't all have the knowledge or resources to host their own server. Therefore centralization is only slowed down in best case. That is exactly why it even needs more decentralization than Mastodon is currently offering. So BS is definitely no solution to this issue.

@gorujocy @joeld @signalapp I had way more issues with the unofficial flatpak of the original Signal client than with Flare. Personally I am much disappointed by Signal in general. Because you can't even run a desktop client without having some mobile client (typically Android) somewhere. So essentially Signal locks you into Google's or Apple's ecosystem for no real reason.

@thomholwerda@exquisite.social @MarkAssPandi@shrimpnet.gej.pet No, it is not. Just read the section titles:

Virtual private networks and the protection of children online:

• The rise of VPNs to bypass age verification
• A loophole that needs closing
• Age verification remains a technical challenge
• Age verification in the EU: Towards a digital age of majority

The titles alone imply age verification would have anything to do with protecting children. They state VPNs would be "a loophole that needs closing" which is pro-active. It implies this would be necessary.

This is not factual. You don't need to close VPNs to protect children and age verification is not helpful in protecting children either. This is opinion, not facts.

@thomholwerda@exquisite.social @MarkAssPandi@shrimpnet.gej.pet I've read the document. If you put in titles like this you still frame the section's content. That means Frace's age verification is put into the same context frame as the UK position. So why would you do that if it's a non-EU position? Because it's an opinion to be pushed and this should be alarming.

@thomholwerda@exquisite.social @MarkAssPandi@shrimpnet.gej.pet So then you would know what the term "framing" means, right?

@thomholwerda@exquisite.social @MarkAssPandi@shrimpnet.gej.pet Says the expert, stating "This article is 100% bullshit [...]" right before citing the article.

@thomholwerda@exquisite.social Imagine as programmer I actually know how to read and write. I know, I know. No two degrees... So what do I know?