hubobes

So wait the guy who actually speaks positively about this is a member of the CDU while an SPD member is complaining? What is going on here?

If believing so makes you happy ☺️

Do not bring up too many arguments.

Nobody claimed that women are not capable. Where are all these weird claims coming from that nobody ever said a word about?

And nobody ever asked to maintain privilege. Claiming however that voting against this was in any way sexist is absolutely ridiculous as long as we maintain a system where women are not seen as equals but as unworthy of equal treatment.

No they should not? Nobody said that.

Also nobody who is in the army here actually believes they will ever see a war. Most people who serve just hate it and see it as a waste of time that will never amount to anything.

Am I in the wrong movie? Women are at a huge disadvantage in life (Gender pay gap, workplace representation, unpaid care and domestic work, education and job positions, healthcare, part-time employment, promotion and career advancement, violence against women, political representation) and we should work to solve that but for some reason we first want to force them to also serve in the military while leaving the current system in place that puts them at a disadvantage? Oh the heavens, men have to serve for a single year…yes that is super important, not all the things they get a huge advantage in life?

Not if said activity is forced upon you. Women can already voluntarily join the military or civil service.

Measure whatever you want but maybe first make it slightly more equal for the ones who have been disadvantaged for decades? But no, one party always focuses on the few things man have where they are slightly worse of.

Oh give me a break, women are getting away worse in so many facets of life. When we have fixed discrimination against women we can talk about them doing mandatory civil service.

Edit: Did not know that on Lemmy we have such an issue with women’s rights.

I mean yes, that is why I wrote the edit. It does seem like you could do this properly, by allowing AI to do rough translations of new articles and humans do proper localization afterwards. And prevent AI from overwriting localization of text that has not actually been altered in the original language.

Why? They have free (as in free beer) volunteers. AI could do translation for pages nobody had time to translate yet but taking over the localization seems unnecessary.

Edit: Okay it is kinda like that, the bot automatically translates everything but volunteers can still contribute and provide better localization. It just seems to not work that well, overwriting things it should not when the actual work is just translating one additional sentence. Or simply not being that great at localization. In general AI translation is not a terrible idea but this seems clearly half baked and Mozilla has stopped responding to the complaints which isn’t helping either.

Holy shit, stop crying about the unintrusive and easy to disable AI features or whatever they mean by privacy feature. Are we still spreading FUD about their FAQ changes?

You better us Consentomatic: https://consentomatic.au.dk/

I mean that is exactly how it works. And if a private company wants to verify your age while violating the law they can do that already, just don’t use their service then.

Why not? They are mostly made up of corporations.

https://github.com/swiyu-admin-ch contains far more than just the client. Only a certain component where they had to rely on a proprietary solution is closed source. Everything else is in the open.

Did you read the law? It explicitly prohibits broader usage without the necessary new laws to allow them to do so.

Do you have the same issue with the W3C or the Wifi Alliance?

Yes because that law did not get a measly 50k signatures. So there is no need to vote.

You can not just say that it is a threat to privacy. Its design improves privacy as we finally can ID ourselves, where it has always been required, without actually giving our identity to online services.