Skull giver

That screenshot again proves that this person is extremely cringe, presumably a troll, but there’s still no threat. At worst that’s racism against Americans. Should obviously be removed by moderators from any normal online service that wants to encourage pleasant conversation, but that’s not necessarily illegal.

As for the PDF, that’s not a legal definition by any kind, it’s a quick explainer for a law that only applies to hosting providers receiving complaints from European authorities. So yes, if the Belgian police sent a takedown notice regarding terroristic content then it does apply.

However, that regulation is mere instruction to EU states to draft compliant laws. It’s not actionable legislation in itself (similar to the GDPR).

The full text of the Regulation does include this instruction for EU countries, which I haven’t seen before:

In order to provide clarity about the actions that both hosting service providers and competent authorities are to take to address the dissemination of terrorist content online, this Regulation should establish a definition of ‘terrorist content’ for preventative purposes, consistent with the definitions of relevant offences under Directive (EU) 2017/541 of the European Parliament and of the Council (6). Given the need to address the most harmful terrorist propaganda online, that definition should cover material that incites or solicits someone to commit, or to contribute to the commission of, terrorist offences, solicits someone to participate in activities of a terrorist group, or glorifies terrorist activities including by disseminating material depicting a terrorist attack. The definition should also include material that provides instruction on the making or use of explosives, firearms or other weapons or noxious or hazardous substances, as well as chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) substances, or on other specific methods or techniques, including the selection of targets, for the purpose of committing or contributing to the commission of terrorist offences. Such material includes text, images, sound recordings and videos, as well as live transmissions of terrorist offences, that cause a danger of further such offences being committed. When assessing whether material constitutes terrorist content within the meaning of this Regulation, competent authorities and hosting service providers should take into account factors such as the nature and wording of statements, the context in which the statements were made and their potential to lead to harmful consequences in respect of the security and safety of persons. The fact that the material was produced by, is attributable to or is disseminated on behalf of a person, group or entity included in the Union list of persons, groups and entities involved in terrorist acts and subject to restrictive measures should constitute an important factor in the assessment.

However, the Regulation also refers to human rights such as freedom of expression. One can be of the opinion that it’s better for the USA to stop existing without any plans or support for actual genocide. Someone expressing hate for your country isn’t immediately a terrorist.

Do you have a copy of the actual threat? Because “you are a settler” is stupid but not an actual threat.

I don’t know where you got that picture from, I can’t find the legal definition for a terroristic threat within the EU. The best I could find is:

For the purposes of this Convention, “public provocation to commit a terorist offence” means the distribution, or otherwise making available, of a message to the public, with the intent to incite the commission of a terrorist offence, where such conduct, whether or not directly committed.

That’s just a convention, though, not direct law. The definition by the convention does require proof of intent, which I haven’t found about the cringe hexbear user.

Shouting non-credible threats (that, based on the screenshot, I can only assume are ironic in the first place) into the internet void isn’t making “terroristic threats”. Feeding the trolls and name calling isn’t conductive either.

Most of the internet is kids and people with nothing better to do with their lives.

While that works pretty well, I find it strange how little people use the ability to tap an NFC tag to instantly connect. Getting the camera pointed at a code only takes a second but tapping a sticker is even quicker.

I guess most people don’t know about that feature.

Can we have a setting to show phone calls as more than a weird notification? I’ve missed calls because my phone was on silent and I thought I was just getting a message.

The Fediverse is a terrible name that only pushes people away. I’d welcome the change of name.

However, the Fediverse was never just about ActivityPub either. The old GnuSocial protocol ActivityPub is based on is also part of the Fediverse. So is XMPP and I suppose by extension Matrix. Like it or not, ATProto is part of the Fediverse too, even though most Fediverse software doesn’t speak it. Services can speak multiple protocols, they don’t need to restrict themselves to just ActivityPub.

ActivityPub folks are probably the largest group of people actually developing an interoperable social media network, though. ATProto is federated but small servers don’t stand a chance against the Bluesky firehose (hundreds of gigabytes of content per day on bad days!) because the protocol is based around “large servers talk to other large servers”. Other federating protocols simply don’t really care much about activism anymore.

Nobody is taking the “social web” away from your IRC channels and your NNTP news groups and your SMTP mailing lists. You can still call them the social web. And frankly, it would be wonderful if more ActivityPub services would speak NNTP because both share the same goals. “I also used to have a social web” doesn’t conflict with “ActivityPub is part of the social web”.

To be fair, DOCSIS 4 uses tk be called something stupid like “DOCSIS 3.1 full duplex” so a lot of areas reporting 3.1 may actually be running 4.

I personally would get a modem with DOCSIS 4 if I had to buy a new one. Replacing WiFi is quite cheap and if access points get flaky there’s always ethernet, but I would get the most up to date stuff on the upstream side just in case the ISP decides to upgrade their network.

DOCSIS 3.0 is a 2006 spec that provides less than a tenth of the bandwidth of DOCSIS 4.0. With the way channels are redistributed, you may not even get more than 100mbps/10mbps if you plug in your DOCSIS 3.0 modem, no matter what your subscription may be, depending on how your ISP deals with old hardware.

The cable frequency spectrum is shared with everyone else, and your ISP isn’t slowing everyone down to make your hardware work, so you’re pushed into thin channels with limited bandwidth that others can use to pull 10gbps down and 6gbps up while your modem will struggle to get any decent speeds.

In theory your ISP could be tolerant to old modems and redistribute their channels such that you’re getting the full speed, but that does mean your entire area gets a lower combined total network speed when people do buy newer hardware. Older modems waste network bandwidth so in congested areas the other side may allocate fewer channels to them.

The latency did improve significantly between 3.0 and 4.0 (ten years of development will do that) but it probably won’t be your biggest problem.

As for the WiFi, I’m still on 802.11ac and I don’t really care that it can only do 520mbps down on my devices. There are some latency advantages to newer WiFi as well but they’re pretty inconsequential if you don’t replace your old modem.

As with so many things, you can give it a go and see if it works. If your performance is not sufficient (or your ISP doesn’t even let your modem connect) you may need to invest in a newer modem.

Newer DOCSIS standards allow for using more frequencies for both upload and download as well as newer techniques. If some frequencies on a network are reserved for 3.1, the frequency space for 3.0 will go down and so will your performance. The frequency space that used to provide 125mbps can now provide someone else with several hundreds of megabits, so you get kicked down to 75mbps for everyone else’s benefit.

DOCSIS 3.0 came out in 2006 and 3.1 in 2013, and 3.1 has already been succeeded by 4.0 in 2017.

I think I’ve used MMS maybe once or twice, but didn’t messengers use the subject header of the MMS messaging for group names? Seems like a waste if they didn’t.

Sounds like malware. Could be carrier-installed malware if you bought your phone directly from a carrier (which is why I’ll always go SIM only, fuck carrier firmware), could also be a virus. Either way, it’s nestled its way into your system partition, otherwise it wouldn’t have background install permissions, and that’s generally Not Good.

I doubt an app that installs trash will be required for your phone to work right. Malware often picks names like these to hide their illicit intent. However, if it’s part of your system ROM, you may not be able to disable it; the system may re-enable it against your will.

I wonder what this will look like when integrating with other apps. I don’t think there’s a standard ical type for birthdays, for instance.

I can’t really say I can find a use for this feature (all the birthdays I need to remember are in my contacts too) but I guess it’s useful if you just want to jot down someone’s birthday but not their name or phone number?

Removed by mod

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

deleted by creator

I don’t really see what that has to do with the feasibility of writing a new browser engine or the development status of either browser engine, but yeah, it was pretty silly of him to get dragged into an argument over that.

deleted by creator