• 0 Posts
  • 29 Comments
Joined 1 month ago
cake
Cake day: January 28th, 2026

help-circle






  • GaumBeist@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlJust how it goes I suppose
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 days ago

    Picking apart the single definition used by one entity doesn’t mean the term itself is completely meaningless.

    But fine, I’ll bite, just for fun:

    the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo

    That’s every country

    That’s “whataboutism.” Or alternatively, it’s “authoritarian realism”—a term I just made up which refers to any view that assumes a nation has to centralize powers to exist because that’s how the world under capitalism currently operates.

    Reductions from what? The USSR was an increase in all of those things from Tsarist Russia.

    So 1. You just gave a counterexample to your first point, and 2. I guess the metric depends on who you ask. It could be reductions from a historical state (as we could say of e.g. the current USA compared to North America’s political systems prior to european colonization), or compared to some standard of liberty (e.g. your use of USSR).

    I can agree with your first point and still posit that the term is meaningful: e.g. authoritarianism isn’t a binary state of extistence, but rather a spectrum that different states can be compared on; all states can be authoritarian to some degree, but some states are more or less authoritarian than others.

    Or to put it another way, saying “authoritarianism” is meaningless because all states exercise authority is like saying “conservativism” is meaningless because all living creatures seek to conserve resources (to some degree).

    I agree that language is an imperfect map for the real world we inhabit—and I especially agree that the language (as with any social tool) gets abused to manipulate people—but I don’t agree that those facts make the terms completely useless in communication.


  • GaumBeist@lemmy.mltoMemes@lemmy.mlJust how it goes I suppose
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    In most instances, “authoritarianism” is a more rigidly defined term than simply meaning “exercises authority.”

    E.g. Wikipedia defines it as

    a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in democracy, separation of powers, civil liberties, and the rule of law.









  • A few answers say “they aren’t private by design,” but don’t really go into the “why.” There’s the obvious “it’s an electronic tracking device, duh” reason, but there’s also a more nuanced reason:

    Airtags are able to be picked up almost anywhere because they connect to the nearest bluetooth-enabled Apple device, and then send location info across the internet to you. Without this functionality (the ability of any and every Apple device to locate it), they wouldn’t have any way to send their location back to the owner.

    Your best “privacy respecting” alternatives are something that uses meshtastic (and hoping there’s enough repeaters near you), something that uses cellular data and GPS (which is about as privacy-respecting as Airtags are), or just a key finder/beeper (which only works within a small radius)


  • This article was more constructive (suggesting alternatives) than destructive (leveraging critiques), but it did link to several critiques/vulnerabilities with OpenPGP.

    Unfortunately, half are about implementation issues (granted, it’s made more difficult to implement something correctly when it’s as convoluted and all-encompassing as PGP)—which are hopefully not applicable to Delta due to their 3rd party, applied cryptography audit—and the rest are obsolesced by the 2024 updates to the standard—RFC 9580, the so-called “crypto-refresh.”

    Do you have any critiques that address the current state of the PGP protocol’s security?



  • GaumBeist@lemmy.mltolinuxmemes@lemmy.worldGUIs
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    24 days ago

    The hardware of a computer is not designed to handle natural language parsing. Techbros with just enough knowledge to be dangerous will say it’s a matter of complex-enough software, but it’s more that human brains are not Von Neumann machines