• 0 Posts
  • 50 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle


  • Basically as long as you don’t link your bank account with your social media accounts in any way, you’ll be fine. Basically don’t put your real name on your social media accounts, which no doubt you don’t do anyways. Don’t for example add bank information to say a Google account linked to that social media account.

    The bank only sees the information you provide it, which is where you send your money and where it comes from. A bank cannot rat you out unless you are sending or receiving money from something illegal in your country.

    A government investigating you on say social media might try to obtain information about your account to eventually tie said account to a real person. For example, you might use a Gmail to sign up to a queer site, and that google account might have bank information if you have Google bank information. Then the government will use said bank information to identify you. Just don’t put your bank information on anything linked to your social media accounts.






  • laylawashere44@lemmy.blahaj.zonetoPrivacy@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s true Vivaldi is not free open source, the code is owned by Vivaldi however, the source code is freely available to audit which is the main security benefit you would get from a FOSS browser like Brave and Firefox. It is plainly not spyware.

    Yes there is the security risk that someone might find an exploit in the source code, and if Vivaldi is notified, users would have to wait for Vivaldi to fix it. As opposed to a third party potentially issuing a patch quicker.

    But this is also basically true for Firefox and Brave. If a security flaw is found it’s more than likely going to be the Firefox or Brave team that fixes it first.









  • The problem with debunking is that it is inherently boring and an inefficient way to learn. To debunk something, first you have to explain the nonsense to the audience (which is ultimately pointless, especially if they haven’t heard the misinformation before), and then you go step by step providing accurate data.

    Itll always be more interesting to provide the correct accurate>!!< information in the first place, because then you can control the narrative that is used to provide the information instead of being forced to conform to the narrative of the misinformation.

    A clear, non sarcastic debunk is simply 50% explaining nonsense, then 50% a list of correct information. And a list is boring. That’s why all the debunkers inject personality into the debunks, because that’s the only way to make it interesting and entertaining.





  • People are going to recommend specialist or convincing them to get hearing aids and what not but that’s just not it.

    Growing up, my grandad lived with us. And he’s exactly as you describe your parents. Deaf and stubborn but refusing hearing aids. Having temper tantrums, etc.

    The way to deal with it is honestly to be firm and to set hard boundaries. But at the same time you’ve got to be able to redirect them and sort of distract them by allowing tolerable BS so as to avoid really destructive bs old people can do.

    For example, my parents would indulge my grandfather in his doctor shopping medical bullshit. They’d let him go to different doctors about his diabetes and general age related illnesses and change meds. Inconvenient to take him to clinics and fill his ever changing prescriptions but better than him constantly bitching about his partly imagined health issues to us and to the rest of the family and doing his oh misery is me, nobody cares for me bullshit. We could always deflect by saying you just went to the doctor last month or last week.

    We wouldn’t let him drive at all. When we moved him in with us we made sure to have his vehicle left at his house in the ghetto. Not driving was a hard boundary. My grandad was prone to getting confused, had poor eyesight and was hard of hearing. So when he’d demand to get his car or want to go off somewhere on his own, we’d always deflect. We’d offer to drive him or offer to do whatever bs menial errand he’d decided was massively important. However, you have to make sure it’s at your own convenience. You can let them take over your life like that.

    When he’d get upset at something or other like politics, you’ve got to listen and let it go in one ear and out the other. You can’t let your emotions outwardly match theirs. The same way a parent would grit their teeth and flatly respond to a 6-year old child’s bullshit, you got to deal with the elderly. You cant be screaming, if they are screaming, it just escalates. You listen, you don’t take it personally, and you deflect from that topic as quickly as possible. You tell them, you’ll look into it, you’ll try. Maybe later. Maybe next week. Oftentimes they’ll forget that shit anyways.

    Oh and finally, make sure they don’t hold any actionable power over you. Like financial power or ownership of the car or house that you use or live in. An old person can be very vindictive and will use it to abuse you if they can. For example, my grandad, had a bunch of money sitting in the bank on account of being a massive miser and offered it to my parents when they were buying a house and stuff. They never took it. My aunt did and still regrets it. He was real mean to her about that loan. It’s just not a good time.