4
submitted 2 months ago by ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io to c/juridisch@feddit.nl

I often save websites to my local drive when collecting evidence that might later need to be presented in court. But of course there problems with that because I could trivially make alterations at will. And some websites give me different treatment based on my IP address. So I got in the habit of using web.archive.org/save/$targetsite to get a third party snapshot. That’s no longer working. It seems archive.org has cut off that service due to popular demand, which apparently outstrips their resources.

Are there more reliable alternatives? I’m aware of archive.ph but that’s a non-starter (Cloudflare).

In the 1990s there was a service that would email you a webpage. Would love to an out-of-band mechanism like that since email has come to carry some legal weight and meets standards of evidence in some countries (strangely enough).

4
submitted 2 months ago by ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io to c/bugs@sopuli.xyz
5
submitted 3 months ago by ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io to c/juridisch@feddit.nl

I often supply documents as evidence to regulators (e.g. GDPR regulators). A document is normally in A4 format and I digitally superimpose that onto an A4 page. Thus generally without shrinking or expanding.

I label it by printing “exhibit A”, “bewijsstuk A”, or “pièce A” in the topmost rightmost corner at a 45° angle and give a small margin to avoid unprintable areas. I do that on every single page. If it would overlap something, I shift it down to avoid overlap. It seems to do the job well but a regulator once requested that I resubmit the evidence without my markups.

So apparently they don’t like my style. Maybe they wonder if I could be making more material alterations. What is the normal convention in the legal industry? These evidence submissions are not for a court process but they always have potential to end up in court in the future.

I have some ideas:

  • (only for paper submissions) I could stick a Post-It note to every document (every page?) and hand-write evidence labels. This would be inconvenient for them to scan. If they remove the notes to feed into a scanner, then the digital version is lossy and so they cannot dispense of the paper version. Or they must be diligent with entering the label into the file’s metadata or filename.
  • (only for electronic submissions) I could make the evidence label a PDF annotation, so when viewing the doc and printing it the user can decide whether to show/print annotations. This seems useful superficially but it’s problematic because the PDF tools poorly adhere to the standard to w.r.t. annotations. Many tools do not handle annotations well. A recipient’s app does not necessarily give them control over whether annotations appear, and how they appear (different fonts chosen by different tools and if a tool does not have the source font it may simply ignore the annotation). The 45° angle that sets it apart and makes it pop-out better is apparently impossible with PDF annotations. And with little control over the font it might look good in one viewer but overlap in another.
  • (versatile for both kinds of submissions) I could shrink the doc to ~90% of the original size, put a frame around it, and push it low on the page to leave space at the top for metadata like evidence labels. The the label is obviously not altering the original.
  • (versatile for both kinds of submissions) I could add a cover page to each doc with the sole purpose of writing “exhibit A”. Seems good for digital submissions but I really don’t like the idea of bulking out my paper submissions. It would add €1 to the cost for every ten docs.
  • (versatile for both kinds of submissions) Perhaps I could get away with rotating “exhibit A” 90° and finely printing it along the edge of the margin. This could even be combined with bullet 3 and maybe with less scaling (~95%).

Any other ideas?

11
submitted 3 months ago by ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io to c/forumlibre@jlai.lu
5
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io to c/french@sopuli.xyz

I would like to understand this paragraph:

§ 2. Lorsque (un opérateur d'un [¹ réseau public de communications électroniques]¹) a l'intention d'établir des câbles, lignes aériennes et équipements connexes, de les enlever ou d'y exécuter des travaux, elle tend à rechercher un accord quant à l'endroit et la méthode d'exécution des travaux, avec la personne dont la propriété sert d'appui, est franchie ou traversée.

Argos Translate yields:

§ 2. When (an operator of a [¹ public electronic communications network]¹) intends to establish cables, airlines and related equipment, to remove or perform work therein, it tends to seek an agreement on the location and method of carrying out work, with the person whose property serves as a support, is crossed or crossed.

I think tends is a false friend here because it seems unlikely in this context. A commercial machine translation yields:

§ 2. When (an operator of a [¹ public electronic communications network]¹) intends to establish, remove or carry out work on cables, overhead lines and related equipment, it shall seek agreement as to the location and method of carrying out the work with the person whose property is used as support, is crossed or is being traversed.

Sounds more accurate. I’m disappointed that there seems to be no requirement that the telecom company obtain consent from property owners. Is that correct? The telecom operator does not need consent on whether to use someone’s private property, only consent on how they deploy the cables?

17
13
3
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io to c/french@sopuli.xyz

The FOSS app Argos Translate enables people to locally translate their documents without depending on an external service and then hoping their content is not snooped on (while simultaneously hoping to get translation service for free). Argos does okay with quite popular language pairs but it’s really not up to a good standard of quality overall.

The machine learning input into Argos known as “models” are trained on samples of (hopefully manual) translations. The models require huge amounts of data. Apparently the effort to gather large volumes of input leads to grabbing poor quality samples, which ultimately leads to bad translations. To worsen matters, you have a sparse scatter of different projects making their own models. So the effort is decentralised in a detrimental way. End users are then left with having to experiment with different models.

Shouldn’t Académie Française (the French language protection org) have some interest in the public having access to resources that give high-quality translations into French?

Consider that Académie Française members each spend €230k on clothes (yes, that “k” after the number is correct), surely they have money sloshing around to promote French. If playing dress-up is worth €9.2 million (€230k × 40 members), just imagine how much money they must have for their mission of supporting the French language.

5
submitted 3 months ago by ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io to c/juridisch@feddit.nl

This question is inspired by Belgian law but there is no Belgian law forum and I think it’s likely that Netherlands would have the same problem. So answers w.r.t. Dutch law would be interesting enough.

It’s increasingly common for law to mandate that people give the government their email address in various situations. If someone has no email address, I have to wonder how can they be expected to comply with the law? When the law requires disclosure of information that does not exist, is it implied that we must take necessary steps to make that information come into existence in order to disclose it? Is it implied by that law that we must enter the private marketplace and subscribe to email service, then periodically check our email?

I happen to have email addresses but I refuse to disclose them to users of Micosoft Outlook or Google. That includes government offices because the gov uses MS Outlook and simultaneously does not use PGP. Since my workflow of non-disclosure to MS & Google has ensured that email has the tiniest of roles in my life, it would not be a big step for me to nix email altogether and end my subscriptions. But I need to know if it’s even legal for me to do so.

3
submitted 3 months ago by ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io to c/french@sopuli.xyz

French law often adds a “bis” (e.g. “Article 29bis”) if more law is added later and for whatever reason they don’t just append it to Article 29.

It’s ugly in text, but I’m writing a document in LaTeX so I have freedom and control to do something better. At the same time, I don’t want to invent something that alienates readers. I just want to know from people who have read a lot of well typeset French what style is common. I think italicizing the “bis” is common. But what about making it a subscript or superscript? What about putting a ½ space between the bis and the number?

11
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io to c/europe@feddit.de
1
[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 9 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

I didn’t try feeding the output back in but note you can click on the 3 peppers and move an intensity slider. That sample I posted was just middle intensity. When I max it out to 5 peppers, it grows to 4 paragraphs:

CloudFlare, the insidious scourge of freedom on the internet, is a devious and manipulative force that seeks to crush the very essence of democracy and free speech. By swooping in with their iron fist of control, they have stolen the decentralized web from the hands of the people and centralized it under their tyrannical rule.

With a cold and calculated efficiency, they have stripped away our rights and freedoms, dictating who can access what content on the world's largest walled-garden. The once vast expanse of the internet, where ideas flowed freely and voices could be heard, has now been shackled and confined by a single corporate power.

This egregious act of censorship and control not only violates the principles of net neutrality and privacy, but it also threatens the very fabric of our society. The consequences of their actions are dire and immediate, leading us down a dark and treacherous path towards a future devoid of liberty and independence.

We must rise up against this relentless enemy, this monstrous beast that seeks to suffocate our voices and stifle our creativity. We must fight back with all our might, for the sake of our freedom, our rights, and our very humanity. Stand with me, brothers and sisters, and let us vanquish this evil before it consumes us all.

Less emotional (×3) is boring:

CloudFlare is an organization that has centralized a significant portion of the decentralized web under one corporate power. This has raised concerns about the implications for net neutrality, privacy, and access to web content.

[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 12 points 11 months ago

Isn’t this different because there are specifically truth-in-advertising laws? Not even a natural person is immune to truth-in-advertising laws. So it seems like Tesla is making a despirate move.

[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 11 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Not sure people are finding meeting-free gigs. I read about someone holding down 4 jobs who once had to attend 3 meetings at once (that story might have been in Wired mag, not sure). Like a DJ he had multiple audio streams going with headphones and made a skill of focusing where his name would most likely come up. I’m sure there’s also a long list of excuses like “had to run to stop the burning food” or whatever. Presumabely a long list of excuses to wholly nix a meeting in the first place as well.

Some people are secretly outsourcing some of their work as well, which works for workload but not for meetings.

[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 12 points 11 months ago

it’s about time we restructure the workforce.

I suppose a big part of that will be managers learning how to measure productivity more accurately than your clocked-in hours. That’ll be the most interesting change.. the “corporate welfare” program of just getting paid to occupy a desk space will have to be replaced with more sophisticated real performance measurements.

I have no idea how that pans out in software. Every bug is vastly different so they can’t merely count the number of bugs you fix. SLOC is a bit of a sloppy measure too.

[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Banks are gradually removing features from their websites in a progression toward complete elimination of the website. Some banks have already taken that step. They impose an app whilst also closing their over-the-counter service.

Unlike the US, 1-factor authentication by banks is illegal in Belgium. So for web access banks typically hand out devices for 2FA. Some banks avoid that cost by imposing a smartphone app in lieu of a card reader or RSA token (BYO smartphone).

There are many problems with bank apps in Belgium:

  1. You must buy smartphone hardware (the apps detect when they are executed inside a virtual machine & deny service [tested with Ing’s app])
  2. You must patronize a surveillance capitalist (create a Google or Apple account)
    2.1. You must subscribe to mobile phone service in order to satisfy Google’s unreasonable demand for a mobile phone number as a precondition to obtaining an account
    2.2. You must trust Google with your mobile phone number, IMEI number, and inventory of apps & versions you download (thus a reconnaissance risk)
    2.3. When Google records your place of banking, you must trust Google not to share that info (with debt collectors, for example)
  3. All bank apps in Belgium are closed-source, so you must trust the apps not to carry spyware and to work in your interests
    3.1. The bank’s privacy policies are written to allow your realtime location to be tracked via the app.
  4. You must chronically upgrade your hardware every few years because the bank apps are upgraded with reckless disregard to the lockstep-coupling of hardware to software on all phone platforms that are supported by Belgian banks. You cannot run a VM to prevent irresponsible electronic waste (see point 1)

The #GDPR possibly (and only symbolically¹) protects from some of that, such as Google sharing your place of banking with debt collectors. But the GDPR does not prevent criminal exfiltration of data that cavalier consumers trustingly agree to the collection of.

Footnotes:

  1. I say “symbolically” because consumers only have two pathways for remedy under the GDPR: article 77 & direct lawsuit. Article 77 has no teeth. When the DPA ignores/mothballs an art.77 complaint, there is no mechanism for action against the DPA. So DPAs are largely neglecting to treat art.77 reports. That leaves direct lawsuits. The EU has decided that GDPR plaintiffs are not entitled to compensation for legal fees. So that kills that option. You can get a symbolic win in court but you still lose because lawsuits are costly and the damages you can prove are negligable. So the GDPR boils down to an honor system.
[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Indeed Europe makes a lot more progress from the point of view of human beings (as opposed to the point of view of corps). But it’s worth noting that Europe can’t actually make effective use of their legislation. No teeth.

Take the #GDPR for example. EU courts are weak, so when your GDPR rights are violated in Europe you have no recourse. You can file a complaint with the DPA under article 77, but the DPA just sits on these complaints because there is no law that forces DPAs to act on article 77 complaints. The GDPR says you can take direct action in court, but the Austrians have neutered that option. Someone sued a GDPR offender, an Austrian court sided with the victim, but then the victim was still forced to eat his own legal costs! That precedent-setting decision killed the only means for remedy.

A courtroom victory in Europe is purely symbolic. The winner still loses from a cost standpoint.

The US is much better w.r.t court actions. Court cases are cheap & easy to open. When you win, the loser pays the legal costs. it works really well. But the problem is there are no decent laws in the US to empower people to take legal action.

What we need is EU legislation with a US court system.

[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 11 points 1 year ago

That link goes to a tor-hostile site. Would someone please copy the text here so everyone can read it?

[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 9 points 1 year ago

Just curious- what exactly do you mean by that? Do you mean abandoning/trashing your google account, or do you mean also refusing to send email to gmail recipients?

Personally I’ve gone all the way. Ditching the Google acct was just the 1st step (which implies also ditching Google Playstore). Then I quit sending email to gmail & outlook recipients. Then I went further and do an MX lookup on all email addresses to verify whether a vanity address like bob@lastname.com resolves to google. This has made #email mostly dead to me.

[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I’m not even willing to visit shields·io¹ because it’s a Cloudflare site.

If so, it might be worth adding the badges to the sidebars.

I would oppose cluttering the sidebar with 100+ stats. Ideally there would be just 1 line:

subscribers: 310/30.6K (local/fed)

If someone wants subscribers per instance detail, that should require some deep clicking around or a dedicated site that keeps track of that.

BTW, #Lemmy has lemmyverse.net (though I think the subscriber counts are misleading there too). What does #Kbin have for finding communities… anyone know? #askFedi

footnotes:

  1. note that I raised the dot (.) to (·) so as to discourage visits and so my msg does not add to the search engine rankings of a Cloudflare site.
[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Note as well sometimes these scanners miss things even when not abused. E.g. I checked out at a sporting goods store where you dump all your purchases in a box which is then scanned. Got home and noticed I was not charged for a bicycle lock. It had its packaging but I wonder if someone inadvertenly bent the rfid chip somehow.

We’ll probably see people walking around Amazon shops bending the rfIDs back and forth as they shop to see if they can kill the tag. Some thieves will probably carry around hole punchers as well.

[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 8 points 1 year ago

Flowchart attached showing the ethical factors of various printer & scanner makers…

[-] ciferecaNinjo@fedia.io 10 points 1 year ago

I am seriously ½ tempted to get a drawing robot. These things seem to have gotten down to us$160 in price:

https://uunatek.com/top-5-writing-drawing-robots/

Or us$140 for a handwriting drawing robot kit (which you assemble IIUC). Those kits are made by “Doesbot” but I see nothing on doesbot.com about them. Looks like some of these devices operate with an ordinary pen designed to be held by a hand.

Would be cool to be able to send letters to the gov in protest of their misuse of tech (e.g. forcing people to solve CAPTCHAs), and have those letters appear handwritten. Would pair nicely with the blood-as-ink suggestion by @Please_send_nudes.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

ciferecaNinjo

joined 1 year ago