• 1 Post
  • 15 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 8th, 2023

help-circle

  • Senal@programming.devtoAtheism@lemmy.mlBook Club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    Personally, I define a cult as either an NRM (The more common use in the 20th century) or a local sect (the more common use in antiquity)

    Sure, but that’s a fairly narrow definition that ignores a large proportion of the actual dictionary definitions.

    I am politically motivated not to consider Christianity a cult, because I believe it makes unjust apology for Christianity

    A somewhat subjective take that doesn’t really explain how the term cult would imply “unjust apology”

    Cults are, politically speaking, groups which have been targeted by the Satanic panic

    Not true, by any commonly accepted definition of the word.

    edit: the term cults can include groups “targeted by the Satanic panic” but that isn’t a strict definitional requirement.

    The fact that Christianity is not a cult

    Christianity does in fact meet many of the dictionary definitions of the word “cult”.

    You could argue that the normalisation of christianity excludes it from adhering to the definitions that mention “unorthodox” or “small” but those definitions are relatively few.

    and that anti-cult religious leaders have not labelled Christianity a cult, is historically important.

    How so ?

    Other than power and money i mean.

    We can’t go using words in a way that implies Christianity is the victim and confuses the history. I object to calling Christianity a cult precisely because I think ill of Christianity.

    I can’t find any reference to the word “cult” that, when applied to christianity. would absolve them of the egregious historical shitfuckery perpetrated by and for them.











  • I don’t know about the fairness of this particular company but by that rationale nothing can ever be fair, just by existing we increase the suffering. Its how the world is.

    Think headphones jacks don’t cause suffering at some point in the chain?

    Not that I’m disagreeing, just not sure how things would get named under this specific scheme.

    Does it assume that it’s generally understood that everything is a little harmful in some way, so as long as you don’t claim otherwise, it’s cool or would everything need to be measured on some sort of average harmfulness scale and then include the rating in the title.

    Like “Horrendously harmful Apple” or “Mildly harmful Colgate”

    A bit hyperbolic perhaps.

    Genuinely not trying to start a fight, actually interested in what you think would be a good way of doing this, as I’ve occasionally pondered it myself and never come up with a good answer.

    Incidentally, this is one of the core plotlines to later seasons of “The good place”


  • I don’t think there’s any data Microsoft can get through you using edge that they can’t also get just by controlling your OS

    I’d put mid-level money on that not being true. There are a lot of things going on in a browser, a lot of which aren’t particularly easy to access from the outside.

    Not to say it isn’t possible.

    There are valid reasons to use windows and if you’ve gotta use it anyway they’ve already got your data from the start

    To a degree yes, but assuming they aren’t pulling nefarious shit in the background, there are in theory many things you can turn off or somewhat neutralise using the options in the OS to reduce the level of data collection.

    They are slowly removing those options but they still exist for now.

    Again, i fully understand people not wanting to go to the trouble to achieve a goal they don’t care about, but that isn’t the same as there being nothing you can do if you wish to.


  • There shouldn’t be any of the Googled parts of Chrome in Edge, just as there aren’t any Googled parts of Chrome in stock Chromium.

    There are at the very least googled parts of chromium in it though : https://github.com/ungoogled-software/ungoogled-chromium

    Unless google have significantly changed the way they package and build chromium recently there are still google web service dependencies and i believe binary blobs (though they may have changed the closed source blob policy iirc)

    Of course, you are now giving your data to Microsoft instead of Google, which isn’t really a win or a lose. If you’re not paying for the software, you’re either using FOSS, or the software is paid for by selling access to you and your computer.

    Indeed


  • If you’re using windows you’re already giving Microsoft data so may as well

    While technically correct, to me this sounds like “You haven’t managed to stop some of the tracking, why not just give them everything?” which is personally not my approach.

    Not to say that my approach isn’t effort and is even effective, but I’d much rather limit the damage in the ways i can rather than give up entirely. I can see why someone wouldn’t want to put in that kind of effort though and i don’t fault them for it.

    Edge uses chromium not chrome, I would hazard a guess there’s much less data harvesting going on in base chromium given it’s open source and people can see exactly what they collect

    Open source yes, but not necessarily free from data-harvesting.

    The fact that un-googled chromium (and others like it) exist implies that straight up chromium being open source isn’t a guarantee they aren’t doing consumer-hostile shit anyway.

    Though, yes, it’s almost certainly less than full-fat chrome.