We don't talk much about it anymore, but the fact that SMS/iMessage/WhatsApp/FB Messages/Signal/Instagram DMs/etc/etc/etc don't work together is a real accessibility issue for #adhd people.
I struggle to keep in touch with people closest to me. Tracking people and conversations across at least 10 different systems is basically impossible for me and many other similarly disabled folks.
This came up for me thinking about the fact that Apple is launching cross-platform Facetime, 10 years after launch. The reason they did this was because Facetime was got destroyed by Zoom in the past year, not for any altruistic reasons.
Meanwhile, iMessage still doesn't work on non-macs, and it certainly doesn't interoperate with WhatsApp or Signal. You know what's more important than privacy for me? The ability to keep in touch with people I care about without a huge burden of shame. #neurodiversesquad
Ultimately, this is another case of companies – mostly run by neurotypical white men in California – making decisions that undermine disabled people for commercial reasons. I'm not sure this goes anywhere, but maybe another angle for @doctorow's advocacy for adversarial interop?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
It would appear that the British government isn't very good at threat modeling. Which is to say, the plans for a "technological solution" to the Irish border problem are criminally negligent, unless negligence is the express intent.
Having read the proposal, …380gtk22pbxgw-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/upl…, the focus is on moving the inspection and clearance of goods and livestock at the point of origin (or, generally, away from the border). This is fine, and in a genuine the-house-is-not-burning-down way.
However, there are no provisions for meaningfully dealing with infractions of the rules. There are, however, explicit provisions disallowing border checks. It's like having a speed limit, with a law alongside that explicitly bans police from stopping speeding vehicles.
While no doubt the US is incredibly broken, many there are speaking out and condemning the rampant racism; it's an active issue.
Here in the UK, too many people are content to be apathetic and tolerant of racism.
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @cliodiaspora view original on Twitter
I'm not going to shut up about this, until the day I leave the UK because the latent xenophobia becomes just too much to bear.
It's not the overtly racist who bother me - it's the middle class "progressive" people, often vegan and socially committed and Labour supporters and all the good things - who refuse to speak out, who think we can just "keep calm and carry on."
GDPR scares me. Not because it isn't a good idea. It's the implementation.
Problem #1: They're doing it in a 'waterfall' style, deciding how everything will be after the law drops, with no clear mechanism or timelines to fix broken things.
External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @IGPAlert view original on Twitter
Problem #2: The above proposal, which describes sweeping, if minor, changes to how WHOIS information is shared, is published as a PDF, and takes 14 pages to describe three simple options. Inaccessibility through bureaucracy.
Problem #3: The people writing this are obviously not aware of the social dynamics of the thing they are deliberating on. The preferred option in this case hides any email address at all for WHOIS registrations.