• 12 Posts
  • 171 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle




  • What an insightful post 🙂

    The only one of these I’ve updated since the original is the one for Ars Technica, which is now this:

    arstechnica.com##:not(:not(head>title:has-text(/Serving the Technologist/))) article:has-text(/Trump|Elon|Musk|nazi|doge|maga/i)

    The reason being that ‘Ars Technica’ now appears in the title of articles, while it didn’t originally, which caused the original filter to block out entire articles. ‘Serving the Technologist’ only appears on the homepage so this updated filter will still filter the homepage but display the contents of articles that contain blacklisted words.










  • zkfcfbzr@lemmy.worldtoAsk Lemmy@lemmy.worldBest Gmail alternative?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    You’re right, based on those definitions the word doesn’t mean what I intended. I don’t know what the right word would be. I used it to mean one who overreacts to relatively minor or inconsequential transgressions, taking drastic, often out-of-proportion or only tangentially relevant actions to rectify perceived harms.

    One example would include people ditching the entire company Proton, an entity with a stellar track record of improving the state of privacy on the internet, after a single member of their board made some dipshit comments. Another example might include the general reaction a few months ago when that misleading story about Mozilla and ad tracking was making the rounds. Other more extreme examples would be the passing of the Patriot Act and invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan following 9/11, or the Israeli response to 2023’s attack on them.



  • zkfcfbzr@lemmy.worldtoAsk Lemmy@lemmy.worldBest Gmail alternative?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    I still thinks his takes were bad and tone-deaf. I get that he liked a certain appointee Trump made that’s relevant to his industry. And, knowing nothing at all about the appointee myself, they may in actuality be a good pick. But he went well beyond praising the appointee, to praising Trump and Republicans in general - albeit for the specific narrow topic of “reigning in big tech”.

    While his takes were arguably valid given recent history (I’d still say not), it was completely tone deaf to the reality of what the present-day Republican party and Trump mean for America, and especially ignorant of the obvious buddying-up big tech has done with Trump in the past few months.

    I think if he narrowly aimed his praise at the appointee herself, without then making sweeping generalities about Republicans vs. Democrats, that nobody here would even be aware of who he is, let alone what he said.

    I do think the internet in general tends to be very reactionary - I don’t think Lemmy is any more reactionary than, say, reddit, but both are very reactionary. Anyone who jumps ship over this guy’s comment will just end up jumping ship again from whatever their new ship is, after that company makes some move they see as imperfect in a few months or years. No company is perfect. Proton is at least great.


  • zkfcfbzr@lemmy.worldtoAsk Lemmy@lemmy.worldBest Gmail alternative?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    2 months ago

    I’ll vouch for Proton. The recent controversy wasn’t great but it’s also a single negative incident for a company that has otherwise had a pretty stellar track record. I recommend reading his responses in the reddit AMA he did after the incident. I still think he’s a fool, but I don’t think he’s fascist or that there’s any reason at all to doubt the privacy, security, or direction of the company, which is both partly open source and regularly audited.

    I’ve been using ProtonMail for probably around 7 years now and it’s been great.


  • Hello again 🙂 I have a good feeling about this one.

    infosec.pub##:not(head>title:has-text(/leopard/i)) article.row:has-text(/Trump|Elon|Musk|nazi/i):not(:has-text(/leopard/i))
    

    It’s doing basically the same thing as the last one but now instead of targeting an <a> tag with the community-link attribute, which was basically just the first way I was able to find of identifying a community last time, it targets the title of the page itself, which seems like it should be a lot more reliable. This does mean using the literal leopardsatemyface-type filter won’t work since the title of the page is the community’s user-friendly name: “Leopards Ate My Face” in this case.

    So as before it should block any posts which contain words from the blacklist, unless they also contain words from the whitelist - and now if the title of the page has any words from the whitelist (indicating we’re on an allowed community page), it will block nothing at all. The blacklist and whitelist will apply to the post title, community name, and even the submitter’s name - anything you can read and even some things you can’t read.


  • I think I may see why. I didn’t actually bother to check the main feed before, but it seems like it does have the a.community-link tag the new filter targets in every post - so if a post from leopardsatemyface ever shows up in the main feed, then the filter will think it’s on that community page and fail to block any posts. But the filter should work fine so long as no posts from that community are currently on the main feed. This should be the case regardless of which regex is used - if it wasn’t just a coincidence earlier I’ll have to test around to figure out what happened with that.

    It’s a process making a good filter, I guess - I may look into a more reliable and narrower way to achieve the desired effect later on



  • Hey! I’m pretty sure this one will work:

    infosec.pub##:not(a.community-link:matches-attr(title=/.*?leopard.*?/i)) article.row:has-text(/Trump|Elon|Musk|nazi/i):not(:has-text(/leopard/i))
    

    Where now we have three filters. If the community name matches the first regex, then nothing at all will be filtered out - and then the other two work the same as before. So any post that matches the blacklist regex will be filtered out unless it also matches the whitelist regex.

    I chose to make the first regex /.*?leopard.*?/i because my thinking is you may want to just copy/paste the other whitelist filter there for simplicity, but it might make more sense to do it like the others, like /leopardsatemyface|second community|third community|etc/i. The “title” of a community for the purpose of this filter should be whatever appears after /c/ in the URL, not counting the @lemmy.world (or whatever instance) part.