kristoff

interesting advice. Thanks!

I do not see that as phone-usage, I'm doing an experiment to see how easy / difficult it is to revert the "i need to know the time, so I grab my phone" reflex back to "I need to know the time, so I look at my wrist".

I'm currently reading some books on how easy it is to manipulate peoples behaviour using 'nudging', this to better understand the social engineering tricks used by hackers.

An chapter in one of these books in how social media use tricks to manupale our behaviour that resemble the tricks used by the gambling industry.

One of the things I find intriging is the size of a smartphones today. If you look at it objectively, they are actually so large that most people would consider it to be annoyting: you have to carry it in a bag, in a pocket of your pants -but you have to take your phone out when you want sit-, or ..you carry it in your hands. Have you noticed how many people have their smartphone in their hand when they walk around? But, of course, if you have something in your hand, it is very easy to open it quickly check your notifications; which reinforces the addiction.

So, that's the thing. People do not find it annoying.

So .. as an experiment, I am trying out how easy / difficult it is to break the habbit.

A small sidenote when (or if) I manage to get my garmin vivosmart HR charges, it does rapport activity per week, number of steps and number of floors I went up on foot per day, even without a smartphone app. So that's at least something :-)

One of the reasons I am looking for a new sportswatch is because I try to reduce my smartphone use and I noticed that I actually took out my smartphone just to check the time.

I have an old garmin vivosmart HR but I do have a problem with the charging cable. Plus I am not able to download the healthstats with my linux 'daily driver' laptop.

Perhaps I should just get a cheap regular watch somewhere? 🤔

I don't. I thought the emoji would have made that clear.

I have been doing cybersecurity awareness lately. We are starting to get over the furst hurdle: make people see the signatures of phishing message. But now we are starting with the 2nd hurdle: make people understand that when they write a genuine post, they should avoid these signatures of phishing, in this case, the "time pressure" argument.

The problem is that the more genuine messages have phising signatures, to more difficult it becomes for people to distinguish a genuine posts from phishing. There is also the risk that you genuine posts will get noted as fake (although that is clearly not the case here :-) )

ah .. currently not available :-/

ah. That looks very interesting. And they have a show here in the EU, and it seems to work with gadgetbridge (thx Lambda RX :-))

Thanks!

my daily driver is a ubuntu laptop so I was first thinking about that, but now that you mention a mobile app, ..yes. that would be nice too.

thanks for the food for thought :-)

A URL 'Free up to some-end-date'. ???

Phishing link? 🤔

One of the basic elements of a democracy are three branches. In fact, democracy is an inherent instable system where these three branches must keep eachother in check. A natural concequence thereof is that every one of these three branches has the right to conduct and lead investigations.

That the courts can act proactive or reactive is more a cultural element then a core element of democracy. There are quite some countries where judges are part of the investigative process and can unilateral.

As Brazil, as a number of other countries in Latin America, has been in the situation in the past that both the gouvernement and the parlement are controlled by people with a .. euh .. not so good reputation on their democratic values, a judicial branch that acts in a more proactive manner should not be that IMHO unexptected.

Here there are two issues: free speech and the judicial system in Brasil. I'll reply to the later in a different mail.

The freedom of speech is the result of democracy. No democracy, no freedom of speech. It is also inherent part of the democractic process.

On the other hand, it is not the only element of a democracy. and it can also be used against these other elements?

My question to you: can you use a fundamental freedom, granted to you by the fact you line in a democracy, to attack democracy?

Big international companies have no problem to create pseudo "national" versions of services if they can make more money with it.

So there should not be a problem for the social media companies to create versions that meets local legislation.

If you create a product and want to sell it in a certain market, you must also adhere to the laws of that country/region.

Protection of citizens against unjust ruling by a court is a protection-principle of democrary.

Why would you grant such a protection to an organisation aimed to destroy democracy (X/twitter)?