chuso avatar



chuso, (edited )
chuso avatar

I know you are not suggesting that seriously, but if we were to consider that seriously, I don't think it would work.
Palestine (and more concretely Jerusalem) is considered the Holy Land by Judaism, Islam and Christianity. That's why the state of Israel was created there and not somewhere else. And that's why Palestinians wouldn't receive with a lot of enthusiasm the idea of being given a state of their own somewhere else.
A big part of the conflict is a "holy war" thing about who controls the Holy Land.

chuso avatar

It works for me, so the issue must be on your side (or they fixed the link)

chuso avatar

I know what a cookie is.
I was asking what are legitimate-interest cookies and what makes them different so they don't need explicit consent under GDPR.

chuso avatar

That doesn't answer the question, does it?

chuso, (edited )
chuso avatar

That's a functional (or "strictly necessary") cookie and those are the ones you cannot reject.
Legitimate-interest cookies are a different thing and you can indeed reject them, but they are on by default.

chuso, (edited )
chuso avatar

LGBTQ+ and labour laws are very different across countries, so it's very difficult to talk generally about how this works without being specific to some country.

I will talk about Spain because there's where I am from and where I worked most of the time.
You generally just cannot fire someone for arbitrary reasons before their contract comes to an end. You really have to justify why you need to fire that person, like having several poor performance reviews against them. Otherwise, you may risk having your firing judged as "unjustified" and having to pay that person a big compensation or even the firing being judged as void and having to readmit them to the position you fired them from.
No matter whether they are cis, gay, straight, man, woman, POC or whatever, you just cannot fire someone without a valid reason unless their contract has come to an end and you don't renew it, that's basically it.

So could someone argue that your sexual orientation or gender identity is a valid reason to fire you because being gay doesn't fit within their company culture or having trans people may cause them an image problem?

No, article 4.2.c of the Worker's Statute says you cannot be discrimanted for employment based on sexual orientation or gender identity, among other criteria like ethnicity, age, union membership, etc.
So you couldn't be fired for being either gay or straight, man or woman, cis or trans, etc. Nothing of that is a valid reason to be fired.

chuso avatar

I like to see it that way, as an easy way to refer to everyone who doesn't fit within the cishet norm.
As others have mentioned, this used to be a derogatory term, so some people may still feel uncomfortable with it, but it has been reclaimed since then and I think nowadays we have long past the point where most people still see it as a derogatory word.
Also, it seems it annoys Graham Linehan, which is always a bonus:

chuso avatar

fedi-block-api already existed and works with any fediverse instance, not only Lemmy.

International chess federation FIDE: a trans woman "has no right to participate in official FIDE events for women" (

The international chess federation known as FIDE has published new rules that state that a person whose "gender was changed from a male to a female the player has no right to participate in official FIDE events for women until further FIDE’s decision is made"....

chuso avatar

Some people are questioning why there are gender-specific categories in chess.

That's a good question and my understanding is that there is only a female category and then the general one where both men and women can participate. The female one seems to have been created to encourage the participation of women due to the general one being monopolized by men.

You may agree or not with that reasoning and I am not trying to take any stance on it, just trying to answer the questions on why they created a gender-specific category in the first place.

I am not really into chess competitions and my understanding of this point is based on explanations I saw from others elsewhere, so I may be wrong.

chuso avatar

One year ago I brought my PinePhone with replaceable battery into the sea and it's still working!

chuso, (edited )
chuso avatar

If you look at the data, the main reason why people detransition is not because "transition wasn’t right" for them.

Turban et al. found in 2021 that among the people who have detransitioned, the vast majority of them (82.5 %) cited external factors for detransitioning such as pressure from parents (35.6 %), other family members (25.9 %), partners (20.2 %) or friends (14.2 %), societal stigma (32.5 %), difficulty to get a job as a trans person (26.9 %) or pressure from employers (17.5 %) as opposed to 15.9 % citing internal factors with only 1 % citing not being able to identify with the gender they had transitioned to, 2.4 % having doubts about their gender and 10.5 % citing having fluctuations about their gender.

And I would even say that only that 1 % could fit in that definition of people who detransitioned because "transition wasn't right for them", as having doubts or fluctuations about their gender can mean something else (like transitioning to something else like non-binary or gender-fluid).

So the vast majority of people who have detransitioned did it because of how hard it was made by transphobes to live their lives as trans people, not because the transition wasn't right for them.
It's kind of a self-fulfilled prophecy where transphobes make trans people's lives so hard that some of them are not able to bear with it anymore so they have to detransition and then transphobes say "see, they had to detransition because they regret having transitioned, hence transitioning is wrong".

It's the same kind of self-fulfilled prophecy as those LGBT+-phobic people who say they wouldn't want to have LGBT+ kids because they would be less happy, but the only ones trying to make LGBT+ people's lives miserable are those phobes themselves.

Why don't more men wear crop top ?

The question started by a joke about t*he hell for tall guys to find fitting T-shirts, like size L shows your navel every time you raise the hands, and size XL expect you to have some beer belly so you end-up floating on the clothes. Somehow at that poing better get a navel piercing and wear a crop tops like ladies do. *...

chuso avatar

Some other already gave good possible explanations to this, but I am adding my own subjective uninformed view on this:

Not many people may actually like wearing crop tops but they do it for 'fashion' reasons and those fashion reasons so far dictated that women are the ones who have to wear them.

Me, as a man, haven't personally tried crop tops, but it feels to me like it would be uncomfortable. It feels actually uncomfortable to me when sometimes I wear an old t-shirt at home which has become shorter leaving some small lower parts of my back or abdomen uncovered. And it's not because of any social construct, I live alone and nobody can really care about what I wear, so it's not that. But it's like feeling cold on the lower back of my torso but warm in the upper part. It just feels uncomfortable.
That's just my personal feeling but I can imagine more people could feel the same.
So I can imagine wearing a crop top can give a similar uncomfortable feeling?

But sexualization of women required them to expose more parts of their body (most of their torso) while covering those ones not considered to be decent enough to be shown in public (breasts). But that sexualization and exposure of their bodies is something that is usually not so much required from men.

I think the original question asks why not so many mean wear crop tops as a choice they make, but I think it hasn't been so much a choice for women as it may have been a command from sexualizing fashion and the heteropatriarchy has determined that the uncomfortably and exposure of their bodies related to crop tops is something women have to wear not always because it's their choice but to comply with sexualized fashion standards.

I am not a woman or wear crop tops either, so I may be wrong on all this, I'm mostly just thinking out loud 😄

chuso avatar

I guess this is the declaration they are referring to?

The only reference I find to Malvinas in that declaration is point 13:

  1. Regarding the question of sovereignty over the Islas Malvinas / Falkland Islands, the European Union took note of CELAC’s historical position based on the importance of dialogue and respect for international law in the peaceful solution of disputes.

Which actually uses both names "Islas Malvinas / Falkland Islands" and doesn't really take any stance on it other than "taking note" of the CELAC's position on the conflict.

So it seems The Guardian's only bother with it is about the EU acknowledging the existence of the issue and using the Spanish name of the islands together with the English one?

chuso, (edited )
chuso avatar

It seems that before Instagram's Threads was launched, was just a domain name parked for sale with GoDaddy's domain auction service Afternic:

So I guess Meta just paid whatever they were asking to be paid?

chuso avatar

What about hidden karma?
Like there is still karma used internally to decide what posts to promote and how to weight votes, but the numbers are kept only internally so people don't get obsessed with that number next to their (and others') profile?

chuso avatar

I know crossposters make transition easier for people who find it hard to completely switch from Reddit to Lemmy, but we've been there already in Mastodon and crossposters were not very appreciated because they are basically bots. They allow you to continue using Reddit or Twitter as your main account while you mirror your content to Lemmy or Mastodon.
It's frustrating for people who actually use Lemmy or Mastodon to find some content they want to interact with and later notice it's from an unattended account that is just mirroring content from another site so your interactions won't get any reply because you are basically talking to a bot.

Lemmy (and the fediverse) and GDPR: a clusterfuck waiting to happen?

So, I’m kinda new to this Lemmy thingy and the fediverse. I like the fediverse from a technological standpoint. However, I think that, if we gain more and more traction, Lemmy (and by extend the entire fediverse) is a GDPR clusterfuck waiting to happen. With big and expensive repercussions…...

chuso avatar

Since the entire goal of the fediverse is “transporting” all data to all servers inside the ActivityPub/fediverse world, the data of a EU member will be transported all over the place.

Not all data is transferred to other servers. That's the point where I think you are wrong.
You mention email and IP addresses as examples of personal data covered by GDPR, but that data is not transferred to other instances, only the instance where you registered holds that data. So you would only need to care about the instance where you registered to be GDPR-compliant.

chuso avatar

Then wait until you find that you can follow Lemmy/kbin communities from Mastodon and comment on Lemmy/kbin posts from your Mastodon account 🤭

chuso avatar
chuso avatar

Probably unpopular opinion: I hope that happens sooner than later.

I always saw packaging every piece of software for every distribution as a lot of duplicate work that could be better used somewhere else.

As an example, Gentoo's default repository has ~18k packages (not to mention the many other packages in additional repositories), each one of them with its own building script, maintainers and tests.
Most of those packages are also present in other Linux distributions, again with their own maintainers, different building scripts and having passed their own tests.

Doesn't that sound like a lot of duplicated work for each distribution that could be used instead on improving the core system and pushing the burden of packaging applications upstream as flatpaks?

Also, since flatpak packages dependencies with the application, they could fix the dependency hell problem in a big part because the developer will determine what dependencies your package runs with, instead of relying on whatever version of the dependencies may be installed in your system.

And it could also solve the quick death of Linux applications. I'm sure most of you saw how quickly applications get unusable in Linux. You find an application you like, but because it was developed for an older version of some library (like OpenAL or GTK+2) you cannot use it anymore.
Have you seen that in Windows? You can still use most of the applications developed for Windows XP in Windows 10.

That of course has its drawbacks. Because you are packaging dependencies with the application, you will have duplicates of the same library for each application, but I think that's a fair price to pay for more stable and durable applications. That's very similar to what Windows applications do.

I'm talking about flatpak. Like most of the people here, my experiences with snap were bad, I am not interested in it and I think it's Cannonical going their own way.

chuso avatar

The Spanish translation doesn't make sense, seems to be made using the worst automated translator.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • bokunoheroacademia
  • rhentai
  • ethstaker
  • Youngstown
  • magazineikmin
  • rosin
  • slotface
  • mdbf
  • thenastyranch
  • kavyap
  • khanakhh
  • everett
  • InstantRegret
  • DreamBathrooms
  • relationshipadvice
  • modclub
  • cubers
  • tacticalgear
  • Durango
  • osvaldo12
  • normalnudes
  • Leos
  • cisconetworking
  • tester
  • GTA5RPClips
  • lostlight
  • HellsKitchen
  • sketchdaily
  • All magazines