SDF Chatter

LaTeX is great for writing letters. It seems like a little known secret how well the scrlttr2 class formats letters for windowed envelopes. LaTeX really makes letter writing enjoyable for programmers (though it would likely be hell for non-programmers).

If I were using a WYSIWYG tool like Libre Office, writing letters would be mundane, boring, and tedious. And the results would be aesthetically limited without doing copious manual labor.

There is noteworthy gratification in turning letter writing into a programming exercise. So whenever a gov agency or corporation fucks me over in some way, I find it theraputic to write complaints and petitions in LaTeX.

There is an hacktivist mantra that goes something something like this:

“write code not text” (not sure on the exact wording)

LaTeX basically turns that on its side because you do both at the same time. I have built up a library of captioned legal statutes in LaTeX, such as commonly referenced GDPR law. So I can crank out GDPR requests quite quickly by using \input statements that imports a very nicely formatted block quote of law which I have thoroughly over-engineered. Also fun to use the qrcode package to reference URLs.

The perfectionism probably consumes more time than using a shit tool like MS Word in the end. But it’s enjoyable. And because it’s enjoyable, it triggers writing more petitions and complaints that I would otherwise write. Every time I get fucked over by some administrative malpractice, it’s another fun opportunity to play in LaTeX and refine my code.

Archived

More than 6,400 attacks against human rights defenders were reported between 2015 to 2024, according to a new report from nonprofit Business & Human Rights Resource Centre (BHRRC).

“That’s close to two attacks every day over the past 10 years against defenders who are raising concerns about business-related risks and harms,” said Christen Dobson, co-head of BHRRC’s civic freedoms and human rights defenders’ program, during a media briefing on the report. Dobson said it was “just the tip of the iceberg” since they only used publicly available information, including reporting from journalists and civil society groups, but many attacks are never reported publicly.

“We also, over these past 10 years, have seen a consistent pattern of attacks, and that many defenders face multiple attacks, and there’s often an escalation,” Dobson said.

Of the recorded attacks, three in four were against climate, land and environmental defenders.

[...]

But if I do it, the farmers call the police on me

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/35411125

Archived

Through a mix of subsidised tours, university scholarships, TikTok-style propaganda and influencer outreach, Beijing is trying to win over the generation in Taiwan that has grown up with democracy, freedom and a deepening sense of Taiwanese identity separate from China.

But how successful has this campaign been? And what are the political consequences? While Chinese soft power has made cultural inroads—especially through popular apps and lifestyle content—it has largely failed to shift the political convictions of Taiwan’s youth. The result is a more politically aware generation—one increasingly fluent in the coercive tactics used against it.

At the heart of China’s strategy lies a simple idea: if it can’t win over Taiwan’s government, it can win over its youth. Beijing is attempting to influence them by showing attention and affection in an overt and attributable manner through cross-strait youth exchange programmes. This form of soft power includes inviting Taiwanese students to China for subsidised trips featuring choreographed cultural activities and friendly political messaging. Scholarships have also been offered to study at Chinese universities, where students are exposed to Chinese Communist Party ideology and are encouraged to become ambassadors for Beijing’s unification message.

[...]

United-front work targeting Taiwan is orchestrated by a network of Chinese party-state organisations that aim to influence, cultivate and co-opt key figures within Taiwanese civil society. China’s Taiwan Affairs Office, the agency responsible for cross-strait relations, has described united-front work as ‘an important magic weapon for the Communist Party of China to unite people and gather strength’. Events that are facilitated by united-front agencies, such as the Taiwan Affairs Office, are intended to co-opt participants, exert malign influence on or redefine Taiwan, its people and its history solely on the CCP’s terms.

[...]

While Chinese soft power has made some cultural inroads, especially among apolitical or disengaged youth, it has not translated into widespread political conversion. Most young Taiwanese still identify strongly with Taiwan, value their democratic freedoms, and remain sceptical of Beijing’s intentions. The memory of Hong Kong’s crushed democracy looms large. So does the daily reality of China’s military and diplomatic pressure.

[...]

Taiwanese youth are not easily fooled. Many are critically aware of Beijing’s tactics. Some are even pushing back, turning digital platforms into spaces for satire, resistance and civic debate. The battle for young minds is real, but it is multi-dimensional.

China’s efforts to charm Taiwan’s youth are part of a broader campaign of influence and coercion. The challenge for Taiwan is not only to expose these tactics, but to offer a better story: one grounded in freedom, identity and the right to choose their own future. That, more than any app or influencer, is what will determine the outcome of this generational contest.

An infiltrator approaches

Not just once, but during at least 3 steps of the process

Edit: forgot the shot of it from KotH lol

Runs, needs new battery, flat tires. First $25 takes it.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.sdf.org/post/35371288

The regulator of banks at a state-level responded to reports of legal infringements by a credit union to say: “why don’t you change banks?” Of course the important question here is: “why don’t you enforce the law? Are banks above the law?”

I wanted to find out how many reports of unlawful conduct by banks in the state were reported and how many are acted on. So I requested disclosure of reports and remedies for a specific credit union.

They’re response: investigations and actions taken against banks are secret.

WTF? This is a public regulator. How is this even possible? To be clear, we pay taxes to finance this regulator of banks, yet we are blocked from seeing whether they do their job? And we are blocked from seeing complaints submitted by the public, thus blocked from taking self-defense measures to avoid bad actors?

Would it be sensible to have a non-profit host a searchable website that publishes people’s complaints before forwarding them to the secretive regulator?

The regulator of banks at a state-level responded to reports of legal infringements by a credit union to say: “why don’t you change banks?” Of course the important question here is: “why don’t you enforce the law? Are banks above the law?”

I wanted to find out how many reports of unlawful conduct by banks in the state were reported and how many are acted on. So I requested disclosure of reports and remedies for a specific credit union.

They’re response: investigations and actions taken against banks are secret.

WTF? This is a public regulator. How is this even possible? To be clear, we pay taxes to finance this regulator of banks, yet we are blocked from seeing whether they do their job? And we are blocked from seeing complaints submitted by the public, thus blocked from taking self-defense measures to avoid bad actors?

Would it be sensible to have a non-profit host a searchable website that publishes people’s complaints before forwarding them to the secretive regulator?