When you sign a contract with a client that asks you to do something, you either do it in the ways described by the contract, or you don’t and don’t get paid. You have no say in how you should work.

Find the rules unfair? Don’t apply to CCS then.

You don’t have to say anything more. You’re in the wrong. You lied, you didn’t fulfilf your promises. That’s it.

I feel like I prefer the voice I hear in my head than the voice I hear when I record myself :(

The voices in my head 👀

🤗 hugs!

I read “left” as his other daughter being dead 👀

🤔

Mais si on les avait défédéré on verrait pas leurs messages je pense

Notre but n’était pas de ne pas les voir du tout ?

Sur une communauté host sur une autre instance, mais depuis jlai.lu, pardon

Effectivement j’ai vu ça mais je me suis quand même posé la question car j’ai vu un post d’un hexbear sur une instance et j’ai pu liker

Il semble que hexbear ne nous defédère plus. La défédération aurait dû être faite même si eux l’avaient déjà fait.

iOS has a nice default set of privacy respecting apps. iOS isn’t perfect but it’s as close as you can get to having a usable phone while having some sort of privacy.

Android always sends requests to Google. A de-googled phone with no Play Services is too limiting.

The illusion of choice

A lot of “normal” dating apps are also owned by the same companies

Not sure killing civilians is the way…

Uyghur genocide is misinformation? 🤦

Good old genocide denying.

ofc they’re here on their own will, and definitely not being brainwashed and forced to work. all good

Nevermind, my bad! It didn’t when I tested this website a few weeks ago

What. The. Actual. Fuck.

I disagree. You can always aim to be neutral, stick to the facts, and not favor a specific side. You’ll never fully achieve it, but you can come close to it.

There’s small bias, and will to have neutrality; and then there’s blatant bias and censorship. We’re in the second option here.

any opinion or viewpoint can be an echo chamber

Saying terrorism is bad is a standard viewpoint, but people that are into it are often in a complete echo chamber

Sure. China bad, USA bad, Russia bad. So? Doesn’t make my criticism invalid, nor misinformation.

There’s just a biased moderation that censors people that have strong takes against some countries.

I got temporarily banned for a month indeed, but what does that change? Not a lot in my opinion. I won’t be going back anyways.

Why do I need to explain my reasoning when it’s pretty well known that China isn’t the best place to live for human rights? On the other hand, I get banned with no explanation, apart from a “Don’t be rude” rule, like what??

Companies censoring speech isn’t the same as a country censoring speech. As far as I’m concerned we still have some sort of freedom of press. Btw, where did I say the USA was perfect? I would put it in the bad countries for human rights due to how they treat non-US people (you probably know the many wars/conflicts they’ve been into and how they feel like they have every rights on other territories like how Isreal was created, or that they can kill civilians in military operations).

Surely the political opponents in Hong Kong are fine and not persecuted as well.

From the little I’ve read about the report you sent, which I don’t have the time to read rn, but might later, I saw multiple things like acts of “disruption of social order” can be considered as terrorist activity. We know that in countries with strong control of the government like China, “terrorism” is often used to justify repression against political opponents. It’s even stated in the report (didn’t saw that it was as I was writing this)

However, again, a number of the activities listed remain stated in vague and/or subjective terms without further clarification as to the content of what these may encompass, e.g., “disruption of social order and other serious social harm”.

What I’m reading is a lot of bad things. The report is rather incriminating.