Training would imply that it made effective activists, but activism from these quarters tends to alienate outsiders. It's more purity spiral than activism.
Well, no, I don't think training necessarily would make them effective given the context of academic activism. If the whole world would look like a college campus it might but there is such a big disconnect between the real world and academia that even the best trained academic activist ends up doing just what you describe. In some parts of society it has worked though, viz. the rise of the 'DEI' phenomenon driven in part by the infusion of academics into organisations who used their positions to bring in more academics of similar mindset while shunning those who did not subscribe to the desired narrative. Where it used to be said that it did no harm to let those silly students larp revolutionaries because they'd drop all that when they re-entered 'the real world' the truth turned out to be reversed in that they took all that ideological baggage with them into society.
I'm going to guess that for many signers-- or at least the US ones-- their opposition to the United States and "its unbridled hatred" doesn't extend to not accepting funding from the US taxpayer.
Entry requirements and the overhead of dealing with visa hoops are a perennial problem for international conferences, nothing new-- and presumably a part of why it hasn't been held in the US in recent memory. But the language on this petition is particularly extreme.
On what basis do you believe that it will meaningfully reduce the dollars lost or persons harmed by fraud, as opposed to simple shuffling around the exact means used?
Well maybe nothing ultimately changes. Maybe we end up in a world where Android users have to wait 24 hours to change a setting so that their devices will install any apps they want, from then on with no further delays. But this seems to me like a relatively low cost for a potentially huge benefit for victims.
I'd urge everyone here to seriously consider switching to GrapheneOS. It's a far simpler transition than e.g. switching from Windows or OSX to Linux, and many people find that it has basically no friction vs android.
More people moving to GrapheneOS is the best tool we have against Google's continued and escalating hostility to user freedom and privacy and general anti-competitive conduct. (Of course, you could ditch having a smartphone entirely..., but if you're willing to consider that you don't need me plugging an alternative).
I'd like to add that you can start in a really affordable way. E.g. the Pixel 9a is typically 350 Euro here and a perfectly fine way to start out with GrapheneOS - it still has years of support in it.
Would but unfortunately I got screwed with a locked bootloader, either going to go the dumbphone or the (much less practical) cyberdeck + SIM card route.
It's about making sure you can't bypass systems like this-- or rather, that when you use your rights under the GPL to remove this privacy invading crud or just otherwise modify your software you'll be broadly banned from interacting with third party services.
It's not an incorrect perspective, but I'm a little disappointed by Mike Masnick seemingly endorsing the wink and nod agreement that functionally implements what would otherwise be a facially unlawful warrentless search campaign by virtue of monopoly providers "voluntarily" acting for the government against their own interests and those of their customers.
The only thing that protects the status quo is that the 4a jurisprudence ignores the most of the coercive power of the federal government and its agents. A better position to take is is that the lawfulness of _all_ this tech company scanning has already been destroyed by this lawsuit and not just if it wins: The lawsuit is a demonstration of the consequences for not "voluntarily" scanning. It helps show that the prior scanning wasn't voluntary at all.
The inheritors are in a better position to kill the author-- or just allow them to die from neglect-- and are incentivized to do so by postmortem profits.
Any benefit from the work being public domain is diffuse, it won't create a windfall for any particular party. The residuals on the other hand are quite concrete, particularly when an author's preferences are capping the market for their work or when the publicity of their death will create newfound popularity.
> The inheritors are in a better position to kill the author-- or just allow them to die from neglect-- and are incentivized to do so by postmortem profits.
An estate tax of 100% would eliminate this moral hazard; but the estate tax is already unpopular when its exemption amount means that few estates pay any tax.
> Any benefit from the work being public domain is diffuse, it won't create a windfall for any particular party.
A defendant in a copyright infringement case would have a windfall if the copyright was extinguished as a result of an untimely death.
The distinction between author and their estates is fascinating: the stereotype is estates mismanaging the art, but that usually happens because the estates want to be “artistic” themselves.
Most artists are terrible at business. They do dumb things for no reason.
JRR Tolkein and his estate is prime example. JRR signed away all movie rights for a nominal sum. His estate fought tooth and nail for their rights, while still allowing grey zone stuff to develop (Dungeons and Dragons).
> The inheritors are in a better position to kill the author-- or just allow them to die from neglect-- and are incentivized to do so by postmortem profits.
This is true now, with or without copyright reform. If the author fears, they can make a will or trust, just like it is today. Not sure why this consideration would factor as a negative signal.
Since you're not realtime you could also have a configurable playback speed on the rx side or processing that removes gaps to make it go faster. This would improve the latency while maintaining the whole store/forward design, and would also let a recipient get more than 100% audio (e.g. from multiple people sending to them).
You're using opus but you might be interested in abusing the DRED error correcting scheme (which is an experimental part of opus) in it as a codec, as it does pretty good sounding speech at 2kbit/sec. You could send the dred first then the opus compressed audio so that if tor craps out before the transmission completes the receiver still get the audio. (A step further would be to run automatic speech recognition, a send text, dred, then opus. :P ).
I am totally interested in a 2kbs encoding if that's possible. I didn't think opus could encode below 6. Making this as slim as possible is definitely what I'm aiming for. Really though the latency basically all coming from Tor.
Someone also suggested that you can configure Tor to take only one hop. You loose anonimity but gain speed right away. May be something to look into as optional setting.
I also learned today I can pipe direct binary without encoding base64. This will chop overhead right away. I didn't think it was possible to pipe through bash but I was using the wrong command.
I do plan to continue to optimize that's great feedback thanks!
reply