• 0 Posts
  • 25 Comments
Joined 20 days ago
cake
Cake day: March 3rd, 2025

help-circle
  • Yeah, Mint is fine and has enough users to have decent guides out there, a broad support system and great comparability. Think of it like a phone: you can pick a Samsung phone of a specific model, or a Motorola, or a Google Pixel or whatever and they can all run the same apps. The brand and model are mostly a preference thing, and while they do have their differences, once you have an Android phone you can see what those differences are firsthand and change later down the road. The biggest shift would be going from an iPhone to any Android phone. Later on you can worry about which Android brand you like best, what you like about specific interfaces or whatever. Some are nicer to use than others for sure, but it’s not as big of a deal as some people make it out to be as long as you get something generally popular, modern and with enough support/backing/users. Whether for Android phones or Linux distros tho, it’s normal for people to have their own preferences and recommendations based on their personal experience and needs since there are so many possibilities out there.



  • Very true. You can find many cases of that though. Just the other day I was trying to get crypto quotes and accounting inside Gnucash, which has been supported by the backend API’s since forever ago, but the interface essentially doesn’t allow for it because the developers don’t consider crypto as currency, and don’t want to support custom currencies or even just using the existing data source API for anything but stocks, derivatives and fiat currencies.


  • Because you can make it so that the required certificate/signature has to meet certain criteria to work. For instance, imagine there was a PayPal equivalent type app for paying QR codes, and they required all codes to be signed by one of their business customers (who they have on file). Or with a certificate they themselves issue their customers.




  • It wouldn’t need a separate app if, for instance, a standard QR payment format way created. If you just want a link to a website to pay, then naturally that would be less secure, but you could always put the URL below the QR code for redundancy (QR would only save time typing then).






  • I think part if the motivation here would be to allow the doctor present at a school to determine whether a child is participating in the correct sex-appropriate placement. Like using the correct locker rooms or bathrooms in case teachers or other students bring up an issue (for example if a boy were to go into a girl’s locker room and claim to really be a girl). Since appearance doesn’t line up with sex in many cases nowadays, the inspection would be to determine the real sex of the individual. Some school activities will involve nudity (changing before entering a swimming pool, communal showering after a sports match or gym class, etc.) so the authors of this were initially pushing for any teacher (such as the supervisor in a locker room or the teacher of the associated class) to be able to inspect/determine the sex of the individual.




  • This seems to be a gross misunderstanding of public key cryptography. Public keys allow you to verify an existing signature is valid and made by the correct entity, but they absolutely don’t allow you to forge a signature: that’s actually what they are designed to prevent.



  • Caedarai@reddthat.comtoComic Strips@lemmy.worldQuishing
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    Well, because it won’t be signed by a trusted CA for that task. Like if CAs had a category of certificate issuance that applied here (the standardisation issue) then it would be easy to spot a fake (which wouldn’t be correctly signed). Alternatively, you could take the European approach of having everything government related (like public street parking, though Europe mostly uses apps for that, not signed QR codes) rely on government entities and those in turn on a national set of government CAs.



  • It’s to do with where people stand. Most people in the US, despite their rhetoric, would be more centrist than many people realize (and between both major parties). That means most aren’t in agreement with much of what Trump is doing internationally or with respect to Musk/DOGE in application, though most might support broad ideas of ‘putting the US first’, ‘reducing the size/cost of the US government’, ‘stopping illegal immigration/deporting illegal immigrants’ etc. But crucially, this also means that most eligible voters are also right of the vocal elements of the left that play up political correctness, identity politics, and social economic policy (economic policy further left-wing than what we see at the moment). So in an election, if neither side really aligns with the majority of voters, it’s easy to see how voters can be swayed by voting against the current party in power, voting due to marketing/propaganda, or voting against the party that seems most radical in ways that differ from voters’ ideas/interests. Trump didn’t campaign on annexing Canada, or invading Greenland, but he did campaign on deporting illegal immigrants and reducing the size of government. And many people saw Harris as a continuation of Biden but with a more socially liberal (or further left on this) attitude and a stronger association with identity politics. So if Trump in his first term didn’t do much that most people would consider lasting harm (despite his antics and buffoonery) and campaigned on ideas that the majority agree with, whereas Harris was a continuation of an unpopular presidency/government (at least at the end) but with a flair of things that most people don’t align with, well, the result speaks for itself: a landslide in the electoral college. The only way forward for democrats is to capitalise on the mistakes Trump is making (unpopular decisions and attitudes), to seem reasonable and grounded to the majority, and to not veer off and start pushing for social issues most of the voting center doesn’t really buy (so for example focus on creating a better immigration system and treating immigrants fairly, but not legalising illegal immigrants. Or pushing for general social protections, workers’ rights, consumer rights, better and broader healthcare coverage and business regulation without straying into a focus on minority rights, trans terminology battles, antireligious discourse or attacking tradionalists/older folks’ viewpoints.) If you can win the center you can win the election. And you do that by appealing to the traditional center (and definitely not by antagonising it).