Dempf

You are so cool.

If I have rate limiting set up (through crowdsec) to prevent bots from scanning / crawling my server, should I be as worried?

Based admin.

I have been looking into this kind of thing. My impetus is wanting to connect my Android alarm clock to Home Assistant and set it to trigger my espresso machine to power on 30mins before I wake up. I saw ESPhome recommended for the smart plug. I'm sure I'll find other uses once I set it up though, maybe even building my own light bulbs.

Yes, I have this one with the ridiculous logo they only used for a few months. Some of the switches are starting to feel a bit worn though, and I don't think Corsair switches are swappable.

I think you are correct that there are parts of the protests that are difficult to verify.

Some parts are easy to verify. There are videos and photos. People were killed brutally in the crackdown.

But the reporting and sources from that time (and now) can be a bit lacking. Information was spotty, and of course anything official can't be taken at face value.

We went through some of this in a Chinese Government class I took. This about 10-15 years ago at a U.S. university. We were looking specifically at how many people died. The Chinese government said a couple hundred. Some western media said over 10,000. Hospital records were like 500. The true answer is difficult to know. We sort of have to interpret the claims based on other information that we can verify (photos, different accounts of the events) and make a best guess to what the true range might have been.

Like anything that's been turned into online propaganda these days, a lot of extreme claims are thrown around to support an unrealistic interpretation of facts. For example, western media claiming over 10,000 deaths turns into "western media was lying to make China look bad" turns into "it didn't happen".

If I have time later I'll try to revisit this thread and point you to some of the better sources I found.

TL;DR: good faith skepticism of specifics can help us learn. However, tankie/wumao skepticism is not really grounded in fact

How can you call me out like this.

When I use the word "private" I mean that stores, for the most part, are not owned by the government. I am saying that laws related to private property apply in this situation.

Technically what we are talking about here is a private business open to the public. And we are specifically talking about non government here, since getting trespassed from public property is a bit different in some ways.

Yes, there are many laws that apply to a private business open to the public (ADA, civil rights, food safety, etc.).

But the store is still owned by a company or an individual. They have the right to determine who can be on their property and when, within the bounds of any other applicable laws.

For the most part my response was concerned with legalities, as you seem confident that a store could lose a lawsuit merely for trespassing an individual. It seems you are claiming that a private business does not have the legal right to trespass an individual?

I'm not questioning your ability to walk past receipt checkers without talking to them. I do the same thing.

I do not dispute that refusing to talk to the store makes things more difficult if their goal becomes trespassing you from their property. However, the store does not need your name to tell you that you're not welcome on their property. If you return, you will be in violation of trespass law. The store also does not need your name to call the police and report a crime. In reality, yes, this is unlikely to happen to you, but it has certainly happened.

I am not attempting to put under scrutiny your ability to file in court the paperwork necessary for a lawsuit in the event that a store trespasses you.

My question is: what would be the legal basis for such a lawsuit?

If a private business decides to trespass you for any or no reason, what would be the basis of your lawsuit?

You are correct that you own the items after you purchase them, and the store has no right to stop you unless they are asserting shopkeeper's privilege. For that, I believe they would need reasonable articulable suspicion just like any investigatory stop by law enforcement.

But at the same time, a private business has every right to ask you to leave for any reason at all, as long as they are not discriminating based on a protected class. They can tell you that you're not welcome back, and if you return then you will almost certainly be breaking your state's trespass law.

In reality, I don't really see any store wanting to start the widespread trespassing of customers who are just walking out of a store with their purchased items (assuming no prior agreement with the store to stop or show receipt). It would be a big customer service risk on behalf of the store. However, it's also untrue to say that just walking past a receipt checker is completely devoid of the risk of a store banning you.

To put it another way: you're at a friend's house, and he says you must stand on your head and sing the alphabet. You refuse. He has no legal way to compel you to comply. But he can ask you to leave his house and not come back. Your refusal to comply with his ridiculous alphabet related request is perfectly valid, but doing so can also bring some amount of risk that you're no longer welcome.

I've been using using Sync since it was Sync for Reddit and the developer is known for flurries of updates followed by radio silence. So it's not unusual for him. It is closed source so if he ever disappears forever it will probably eventually break. But it's a great app.

Why does he suck?

Folks this is the most based admin in the fediverse.