Shifty Eyes

Instructions on how to disable

puts away pitchfork and lit torch

Thank you

Ugh. My Obi-wan moment or something. ‘You were the Chosen One Proton!’

Agreed on the stupidity. He should have had PR running his accounts or at least approving his posts. But now that the cat is out of the bag I’m really conflicted about being a Proton Visionary subscriber, and try to use other services like Filen, Cryptpad, Bitwarden, Aegis, etc, so I’m not all concentrated on Proton like I was on Google Suite.

I just made a Tuta mail account for if I do decide to move away from Proton.

I have similar conflicted feelings after being a long time Visionary Subscriber.

https://medium.com/@ovenplayer/does-proton-really-support-trump-a-deeper-analysis-and-surprising-findings-aed4fee4305e

There’s a lot more nuance to it than just ‘Proton CEO supports Trump (and therefore all of Trump’s policies)’

From the comments: “Andy’s statement was to recognise the choice of the Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust division at DOJ. This is someone who has history of going after tech monopolies and allowing room for the little guys (startups) to have a fair chance to grow and innovate. This was not a political endorsement.”

And at the very least the CEO controversy reveals all the issues with America’s two party Sith or Jedi system, there’s no room for nuance or discussion, just rage. Look at all the other top comments here.

Their recruitment practices are also profit-seeking. Job applications require your salary expectations and they don’t post their salary range.

deleted by creator

Some alternative for you for the keyboard:

https://github.com/Helium314/HeliBoard

https://app.futo.org/fdroid/repo/

https://keyboard.futo.org/

https://voiceinput.futo.org/

Edit: Check out their other apps too, you might find something you like https://futo.org/

My ex kept her’s in an unprotected excel file. I never peeked, I was just surprised when I saw her accessing it on her laptop.

Instead of Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon, it’ll be 6 degrees and we’re all bakin’

More than meets the eye 😏

Try this brand https://www.sceptre.com/

https://mntre.com/index.html

https://www.crowdsupply.com/mnt/mnt-reform-next

I loled

Help me Futo’s Louis Rossmann, you’re my only hope.

Consumer Action Taskforce! aka CAT

Agreed. I live in Japan and self censor what I say online, avoid leaving negative but truthful business reviews, because there is a very real risk of being sued for libel.

Yes, if you only consider the letter of the law. But the spirit of the law and the pro-business, pro-those-in-power courts rarely rule in the individual’s favor. The laws weren’t made for you the individual.

Don’t Get Sued! Libel, Slander, and Defamation Laws in Japan

More relevant discussion here about the concept of face.

edit: Key comment here:

“The law in Japan has a cultural and legal background in much older laws about “damage to honour”. Anything that damages someone’s social standing, regardless of whether a specific claim is being made, is not on and is liable to be considered defamatory. Further, the lack of a specific claim makes the “truth and public interest” bar much, much harder to meet since you can’t claim that your statement was truthful or in the public interest if there’s no specific claim the business or person can respond to. If you’re just being insulting you’re one a one-way trip to a legal spanking.”

I live in Japan and self censor what I say online, avoid leaving negative but truthful business reviews, because there is a very real risk of being sued for libel.

Edit 2: I dug up some China specific info: “In Understanding and Application of the 1993 Answers, the SPC [Supreme People’s Court] clarified that truth was NOT a defense to defamation. If a work insults and damages a person’s reputation, it is defamatory even if true.”

I’m having trouble finding more info about the specifics of the ruling in the Tesla case (AP, CBS, English media don’t provide any info), but I’d bet my dollarydoos that the ruling relates to the Chinese civil code concerning the rights of ‘reputation’ and ‘honor’ of Tesla being infringed in this instance. The AP article misses a lot of this nuance and detail, which is unfortunate. Something like The Atlantic or the Economist, Foreign Affairs (or NYT 20 years ago) with long form articles and investigative journalism from the days of old might have provided this detail, but these days BBC, CNN, et al care more about click-thru rates so we don’t get the full picture.

Japan has similar laws curbing free speech. It comes down to the east asian concept concept of ‘face’.

In sociology, face refers to a class of behaviors and customs, associated with the morality, honor, and authority of an individual (or group of individuals), and their image within social groups. Face is linked to the dignity and prestige that a person enjoys in terms of their social relationships.

Japan’s defamation/libel laws, similar to this Tesla case China, don’t matter if what you said is true. What matters is that you disrespected the ‘face’ and reputation of those in power.

“(1) A person who defames another by alleging facts in public shall, regardless of whether such facts are true or false, be punished by imprisonment with or without work for not more than three (3) years or a fine of not more than 500,000 yen.”

For example, if a news agency reports on a rapist, or an individual puts up a bad review online: it doesn’t matter if it is true. The ‘victim’ sues you for libel/defamation for speaking the truth because you didn’t “give them face” and you hurt their public reputation. Expect the police to come knocking and ask you to remove your truthful reviews, or you risk jail time or civil penalties.

Edit:

The judicial system in China is fucked up beyond repair.

I suspect the judicial system here is working exactly as intended. Its the laws in Japan/China that are fucked when it comes to free speech vs protecting the ‘face’ of those in power.

Edit 2: I dug up some China specific info: “In Understanding and Application of the 1993 Answers, the SPC [Supreme People’s Court] clarified that truth was NOT a defense to defamation. If a work insults and damages a person’s reputation, it is defamatory even if true.”

I’m having trouble finding more info about the specifics of the ruling in the Tesla case (AP, CBS, English media don’t provide any info), but I’d bet my dollarydoos that the ruling relates to the Chinese civil code concerning the rights of ‘reputation’ and ‘honor’ of Tesla being infringed in this instance. The AP article misses a lot of this nuance and detail, which is unfortunate. Something like The Atlantic or the Economist, Foreign Affairs (or NYT 20 years ago) with long form articles and investigative journalism from the days of old might have provided this detail, but these days BBC, CNN, et al care more about click-thru rates so we don’t get the full picture.