Sure, but where did they get my phone number from???
It’s like Facebook locking you out of your account and requiring you to present government ID, which they’ve never seen before and thus cannot use to prove ownership of the account. The request itself is a thinly veiled fish for more valuable information.
I never even provided my phone number to Paypal, then one day they started requiring me to use it to verify logins.
Not the one you replied to but they’re probably talking about Kagi. I crunched the numbers a while back and the higher tiers were kind of hard to make worthwhile, however iirc they simplified the pricing slightly since then.
That’s my go to, FOSS app that rivals the major apps.
There are other podcast apps on F-Droid also.
I made a simple comment showing my support to the admin, which after this experience I’m sure is much needed. You’ve come in here behaving like an ass with zero effort yourself - you were wrong, my comments have had far more value to the discussion than anything you’ve brought. I don’t think the problem is the platform, I think the problem is you.
That depends on whether the connection is sold to cover one device or several.
They can care about what device they’re providing internet to. Net neutrality is about where content is coming from.
Net neutrality is about service to last mile customers, but it is based upon interconnection agreements across the L1 and L2 level.
ISP’s pay for a connection to L1 and L2, so their users (who pay ISP’s) can access content on those networks. Websites pay for a connection to L1 and L2 so their content can be available on those networks.
ISP’s want to also charge websites for access into their networks of users, in spite of the fact their users already pay them for access to the website content. If some websites don’t pay, then ISP’s will provide a lower service to their users for those websites. Net neutrality says ISP’s should not do this.
Differentiating between locally used data and hotspot data has nothing to do with this. Hotspot data is about the device the data is going to, not where the data is coming from, and typically (or at least traditionally, maybe not so anymore) a PC will use more data than a phone. A PC is more likely to have large multi-gigabyte downloads (eg games), although these days video streaming is perhaps the main bandwidth hog and is generally equal across all devices.
A home internet connection is expected to serve all devices in that home, while a mobile internet connection is expected to serve only that mobile device (excluding mobile broadband options, which serve multiple devices but are typically more expensive). The ISP’s network is designed with this in mind.
It is more reasonable for an ISP to only provide data to the phone you’re paying for than it is for them to throttle websites you already paid for. However, really both are kind of bullshit - usage limits in general are completely disproportionate to actual costs.
Yeah it’s definitely true, even with the same manufacturer it can be hit and miss. You gotta do your research before you buy.
and that’s even if your phone/carrier allows it.
This is why you should buy the phone outright yourself then get a SIM only deal, rather than paying for your phone in contract.
Lol when I travel to the US I get 12GB roaming per month included for no extra charge.
It’s worth it for more than a few days, custom ROMs ftw.
Personally my minimum features are:
All the other stuff and customisation is just tasty gravy.
This has little to nothing to do with net neutrality, which refers to back end L1 and L2 network interconnections.
a lot of people choose Reddit, or Facebook, or Instagram, or Snapchat, because the tradeoff is agreeable.
A lot of people choose those sites because they don’t understand the trade off, because the site is presented as “free of charge” while the exchange of your data is a secondary transaction hidden in the fine print of the terms and conditions. It is NOT and exchange of data for access to the service, not at the point of sale, not the way they present it.
There is also a nuance in that you have to grant them rights to your work in order for them to legitimately host the material. This is essential, but they use it as an opportunity to claim far more rights than are necessary, without any fair exchange.
They still have the right to distribute it. It’s not like reddit, who not only claim the right but also apparently claim ownership of any content you publish there, while providing no consideration (payment) in return.
However, as you say, they have the right to deny you, and by copying you are subverting their rights. That’s still not theft, though, which is why copyright infringement is a separate offense.
Theft is a crime, copyright infringement is a civil matter.
Depends on how you define stealing.
Stealing is theft, or in US law larceny, which is very clearly defined. Copying does not meet this definition, hence why copyright infringement is a separate offense.
Theft is a crime, copyright infringement is a civil offense (except commercial copyright infringement, which can be reached if the value exceeds $1,000 - lobbyists worked hard to criminalise what normal citizens were doing and had success in this point, while they still get away with fleecing everyone, both artists and end users).
Always.
I think they’ve just defederated the community, so they can see users commenting from dbzer0 but can’t access !piracy@lemmy.dbzer0.com themselves.
But generally yes, federation is two way. It’s possible for one side to defederate while the other side to be federated, in which case users on one side could post comments but they’d only be visible to instances that are federated with them. Eg, if lemmy.world was not federated with dbzer0 at all, but it was still federated with lemmy.ml, then dbzer0 comments in lemmy.world would show up for dbzer0 and lemmy.ml users but not for lemmy.world.
The fingers on that mug, which also doesn’t have a handle, lmao
All software from torrent sites should be treated with a wary eye.