It depends on which license you look at. E.g. from https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode.txt:

c. BY-SA Compatible License means a license listed at creativecommons.org/compatiblelicenses, approved by Creative Commons as essentially the equivalent of this Public License.

It was a while since I looked at this but IIRC the BY license was fine in its early versions but none of the others were. Then I vaguely recall seeing links in later versions of the BY license as well (but that may have been hasty reading on my part since i’m not seeing it in the BY 4.0 ATM). Anyway, it’s a mess.

That doesn’t really work. The URL is an inherent part of the CC license. Archive.org might do link replacement but that does not change the license… it merely corrupts/misrepresents the license. Users of CC-licensed work are still bound by the actual text of the license. IIRC the URL was to refer to something that changes over time, thus making the license dynamic when archive.org works off of snapshots.

I vaguely recall Richard Stallman bad-mouthing public domain in favor of free licensing. I don’t recall the details but I imagine the artist would at least want attribution, which I doubt the public domain ensures.

Of course if we could have predicted his death there are many trivial ways we could have ensured his will is expressed and executed. But it may not be a lost cause… whoever controls the estate would likely know or believe that he wanted to liberate his work.

One annoying limitation is that the last page and a penultimate page cannot have different behavior in the picturecommand option. I thought I was fucked for ½ a day. But hacked around that by using the pagecommand and nesting \ifthenelse{\AM@page = (penultimate page №)}{\begin{picture}(0,0)\put(50,-50){…}… inside the pagecommand. Makes me wonder what’s the point of having the picturecommand. There is a picturecommand* which only executes on the 1st page, and apparently no equivalent for pagecommand – but we can test the internal variable anyway.

Someone tells me “look into \scantokens instead of rewriting to a file”. After a brief look, I have to say: No. Fucking. Way. That looks like a rabbit hole that leads to the center of the planet. No thanks… I don’t need to spend weeks more on this digging through (what looks like) the most raw low-level code that makes assembly languages look like tinker toys.

Low level TeX code really seems like a strange beast. Something you should learn in your early teens while the brain is still highly plastic. I wish I learnt it because I would better understand all the bizarre and obscure glitches I run into with LaTeX. But I think I might be past the point where benefit outweighs the pain.

Thanks for the tip. It seems to work but I have to say it’s a rough UX because the UI is really meant for a graphical browser. I could not even paste my UID and PW in to login.

For the same reason, I suppose you would love text adventure games like Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, where you have to come up with your action, as opposed to getting visual aids which come like a loaded question, steering you and somewhat robbing you of control.

indeed… #NeonModemOverdrive failed for me too.

So, how did you do post to lemmy.ml? Did you use cURL? If so, I would love to see the sample code.

It is exactly that.

There are ~95 pages of rights and obligations covered in EU Directive 2015/2366, as well as EC Regulation 593/2008. Have you read them, or anything else to substantiate your claim?

You’re trying to solve the wrong problem.

There is no such thing as a “wrong problem”.

You do you. This thread is not about your problems. Start your own thread if you want a different problem worked. In this thread, you can either help solve the problem at hand, or fuck off.

There was a story about a German guy insisting on paying his radio licensing fees in cash. He setup an escrow account and paid his invoices into that, so that the state could not claim he was just using cash refusal as an excuse not to pay. I don’t think I ever heard what came of the legal case.

I heard postbank was eliminated in Germany but post office banking is still an option in other countries. I doubt any post office banks stand on their own. The one I’m aware of is just a proxy for another crappy bank.

Many elderly people can’t use a smartphone so smartphone only options definitely sound like a no go.

It’s somewhat convenient that tech illiterates are in the same boat with the streetwise (who are tech saavy enough to distrust commercial tech that’s being pushed down our throats). But there are efforts to divide us. Elderly folks are getting social helpers with tech, which will shrink those resisting enshitification of everything to a population that’s easier to marginalise. I also don’t suppose it will be long before the tech illiterate elderly are no longer with us anyway.

at least in Germany companies and state are not anymore required to accept cash for invoices

Yikes. That’s a shame. There is the EC Recommendation of 22 March 2010 (2010/191/EU) which wisely states:

A debtor can discharge himself from a payment obligation by tendering euro banknotes and coins to the creditor.

I am surprised Germany has gone against that. I thought cash was loved by Germans.

Glad to hear you’re standing up for yourself, and others. And glad to hear an analog option is still possible. That’s by far the most important option. If you can do everything offline, then you can escape whatever garbage tech they try to push. Essential services like banking and utilities should always have an offline analog option.

The thesis is: what are our rights? Knowing your rights is a good idea /before/ you go off and try to solve a problem.

It may very well be that we have no useful rights and the choices are: be bullied, or find a different bully. But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Other banks are garbage too, so it may be better to improve the bank you have (if possible through legal actions and exercising your rights) then to make it someone else’s problem.

you should probably just keep the money in cash

Of course. Cash would solve the problem. But creditors are refusing that now and also refusing cards at the same time. Otherwise the bank card could get cash out of the ATM and pay the creditors.

No, not anymore. They became app exclusive. Customers must become an Apple or Google patron, or just use the bank card. They also closed their shop doors and terminated their phone number. If you call them on their unpublished phone number, they insist: “email us” and they refuse to give any service over the phone. And their email goes through gmail (and no PGP key given). Paper letters are ignored. They also refuse manual transfers. The app is the sole means for transfers.

The EU has that covered as REGULATION (EU) No 260/2012 imposes 2FA.

But for me personally, I do not trust closed-source apps from surveillance advertisers running on a Google or Apple proprietary platform, no matter how well they do the 2FA. Even if the endpoint were impenetrable, I do not trust the bank itself not to snoop – in part because I do not trust the GDPR, which is scantly enforced and regularly disregarded to a laughable extent. And from the ecocide PoV, I refuse to throw away good hardware and support designed obsolescence. They can pry my old phone from my cold dead hands.

Thanks for the feedback. A couple other people also say they have no problem.

I am trapped on a 3-year old version. I could upgrade from 4.0.7 to 4.0.9, but that’s as far as I can go because 4.1.9 abandons anyone running AOS older than 6.0. So I wonder if they recently changed the map server in a way that breaks old versions.

I am also on Tor. But also tried a VPN. I doubt they would block Tor and VPNs and then also introduce blocks on both at the same time. Thought I should mention it in the remote off chance that it matters.

you can’t just scream legal tender and throw physical money at your creditor¹.

IIRC in the US it’s written simply that if you leave legal tender in the creditor’s possession, your debt is reduced by that amount regardless of what they do with it. But of course gathering evidence in that case can be dicey.

If I remember rightly you need to lodge it with the courts and then it basically prevents you from being sued as the money is there to pick up.

There was a guy in Germany who fought the forced use of electronic payment for radio licensing fees that way. He escrowed it in a blocked account so that the gov could not claim he was just looking to evade the fees. It seems like a good approach.

You’re probably right. But certainly I have seen laws that push back in situations where the party with the greatest amount of power and privilige subjects the other party to various factors outside of their control, where the law counters that to mitigate unfairness.

The GDPR exhibits this with a “fairness” clause, which the EDPB reflects on as follows:

None of that applies to my non-GDPR situation, but just an example of law that tries the shift burden of risks back onto the party with the most power. Labor law often has rules to protect workers from becoming subject to risks and factors outside of their control. In my case I need to look more at credit and debt laws, where the creditors tend to have disproportionate power. The UK’s legal tender law is one such tool to relieve debtors from the disempowerment of forced banking (which is weak where I am but there may be another mechanism).

took an action, namely leaving the country, of your own free will

It’s perhaps worth noting the Universal Declaration of Human Rights art.13:

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State.
2. Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.

That does not necessarily contradict anything you said, but I think it is a bit harsh for a creditor to make debtors choose between their human rights and satisfying their contractual obligations.