Dsklnsadog

joined 2 years ago
[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

No. If you are not an us citizen you have no "american rights" until you cross the border. They can even steal your phone and make you tell them your password.

[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 5 days ago (4 children)

But isn't your family in the States? I read a while ago that immigration can sometimes be vindictive toward former citizens who renounced their citizenship when it comes to applying for a visa—even if it’s just for a tourist visit to their former country

[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 week ago

He just wants to fight. Leave him alone, like his dad did.

[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

The best thing you can do is just ignore it. Like I'm doing with this thread after this comment. Have a great day!

[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 34 points 3 weeks ago

DING DING DING DING

[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I use standard notes.

[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 2 months ago

I get what you’re saying, and I don’t disagree that the abstraction makes it easier for investors to detach themselves from the reality of what’s happening. But at the same time, isn’t that part of how all markets work? Investors don’t make the rules—they just operate within them. When it comes to private prisons, for example, the wrongful imprisonment of innocents or mass deportations aren’t supposed to be part of the “business model.” That’s a failure of the state, not the investor. In theory, these facilities exist to meet state demand for detention, which should be lawful and just (even if we know that’s not always the case).

And honestly, this kind of abstraction isn’t unique to private prisons. Look at almost any other industry:

Investing in food companies? You’re indirectly supporting things like worker exploitation, environmental damage, or factory farming (which involves a lot of animal suffering). Transportation? Cars, planes, and ships pollute the planet on a massive scale. Tech? There’s often exploitative labor behind those shiny gadgets, not to mention privacy violations or harmful social media algorithms. Fashion? Fast fashion profits off sweatshops and massive environmental waste.

If you zoom in on any one of these industries, the moral complications are everywhere. But most of us don’t expect investors to shoulder the blame for all of this—they’re operating within the system as it exists. To me, the real responsibility lies with governments and regulators to set the rules and hold these industries accountable. Investors aren’t actively making the decisions that harm people; they’re just responding to opportunities in the market.

At the end of the day, if we reject every investment tied to something morally gray, we’d have to swear off almost everything. I think that’s where the abstraction helps—it lets people focus on their role (whether as investors, consumers, or workers) without taking on all the guilt for how the system fails. Is it perfect? No, but it’s how the world works right now.

[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

Are you saying is not? When applied to investments, the abstraction becomes even more pronounced. As investors, individuals might focus on profit potential (commodities and returns) without directly engaging with or even acknowledging the human or social costs underlying those profits. The market acts as a buffer, depersonalizing the consequences and further alienating participants from the broader social implications of their actions.

So, yes, you’ve heard this before, and it’s a classic critique of how capitalism distorts and reframes human connections in terms of profit and exchange! Marx argues that under capitalism, commodities take on a life of their own, obscuring the labor and social relations that produced them. The true connections between people—worker to worker, worker to consumer, are hidden behind the veil of market exchange.

[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com -4 points 2 months ago (4 children)

The question of morality in investments is not absolute; it depends on how one frames responsibility and agency.

Markets are amoral tools. Financial markets operate independently of moral judgments. When individuals invest in an industry, they are not necessarily endorsing its practices but recognizing an opportunity within existing systems. One can argue that targeting an investment does not equate to creating or exacerbating the problems within that industry.

The existence of private prisons and deportation schemes reflects systemic issues, not individual investors. Policies and demand for incarceration stem from government choices and public sentiment. As such, targeting investors as "bad people" shifts focus away from the policymakers and institutions enabling these systems.

Some may justify these investments pragmatically: by securing financial stability, individuals can later support progressive causes, donate to charities, or fund organizations fighting for systemic change. For example, an investor might use the returns to support immigrant advocacy groups or lobby for prison reform.

There is algo "Separation of Investment and Values". Not every decision must align with one’s ideological framework. People often compartmentalize their personal lives from their professional or financial strategies. A leftist could rationally engage in capitalism as a survival mechanism within an inescapable capitalist framework while still advocating for systemic change.

Many industries—tech, energy, or agriculture—have problematic practices, from exploitative labor to environmental harm. Singling out private prisons overlooks the broader complexity of investing in any sector. Most portfolios inadvertently include industries with ethical concerns, such as fossil fuels or fast fashion.

Defending this investment as not inherently immoral hinges on the premise that financial actions alone do not define someone’s character. Morality lies in how individuals balance their actions, mitigate harm, and contribute positively to society. However, ethical investments often require introspection and alignment with long-term values. While investing in private prison contractors can be defended on pragmatic or systemic grounds, it’s worth questioning whether the financial gain outweighs the potential ethical compromise.

[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

[–] Dsklnsadog@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 3 months ago

No thanks, we're good.

 

Hello everyone,

I've been using Standard Notes on the recommendation of Privacy Guides since the beginning of this year, I believe, and it has truly been a fantastic experience. It serves my purpose perfectly, is truly cross-platform, open source, and lightweight. It was a real find, and I couldn't be happier to have it installed. However, it seems that they are planning to change the licensing to one that restricts companies from abusing their code (which makes sense), but I wanted to know if this goes against the guidelines in terms of considering it recommendable.

I don't really understand licenses, so correct me if I'm wrong, but with this change if the project becomes private, a fork couldn't be created for all users who want to continue having the software format but not the backend... Is that correct?

Thanks

 

Is there any app like Fritter? I mean, I need Twitter for my job, but in a passive way. What is the best option without login in the official app or website (Linux/Android).

Thanks!

 

What do you guys think about Tuxedo OS from a privacy point of view? Thanks

 

Hello, I try to keep my Debian laptop as private as possible, but for work, I need to use Windows software, so I run a VirtualBox with Windows 11. My PC runs smoothly without any issues, but I need to access my specific hardware USB ports, and it doesn't recognize them. I read that I need to install the Extension Pack, so I downloaded it, but before installing it, I get a warning message that seems to suggest I'm accepting some risk to my computer. I don't really understand this stuff, so I wanted to ask the following:

Is there any security or privacy risk associated with the VirtualBox Extension Pack?

Is there any other way to access my USB-C devices without installing it? (I've already tried selecting USB 2.0 and 3.0, but the list shows "no device available").

Thank you very much to whoever responds.

PS: Also I found this on the Internet: "The user agreement VirtualBox extension pack states of sharing a user’s data to the US govt. including the hardware information and so on. Does it make sense even if I use Tails/Whonix for anonymity?" :-/

view more: next ›