chirospasm

I know you’re getting dragged in the comments / downvoted, but the premise that the internet is not a fully reasonable ‘third’ place has some rationality, as does the premise that churches have been this ‘third’ place for many. And I think ‘third’ places are where leftist community-engagement thrives, even in religous settings.

I mention leftist simply because many here are commenting from leftist Lemmy instances, myself included. Historically – and for a moment, consider this outside the typically nonreligious, leftist approaches to community building – churches have occupied a helpful, physical ‘third’ place like this for centuries.

When they are healthy, churches have been relationship hubs of solidarity and mutual aid. They have also been regularly used platforms from which to mobilize for social justice and collective action – even today, I know of some churches that are engaged directly in social justice and collective action for queer communities, debt reduction / removal, resource sharing, and more. Liberation theology is gravely leftist, as well, and comes from Latin American churches with leftist clergy and non-clergy at the helm of both theory and praxis. The Civil Rights Movement was borne out of black American churches, and suffrage movements met in churchhouses as much as anywhere else. This list goes on.

Liberation / radical inclusivity activities can spring from any setting where people gather regularly and talk about change. While the internet can make that sometimes easier, it has been historically in-person, where folks gather, that these movements find momentum time and again. ‘Third’ places are historically and functionally physical.

Theory is great for the internet, and even some community-engagement through internet discussions on theory is great. Some, but not all.

Praxis happens offline, though, in anti-technofeudally controlled arenas.

There’s a handful of approaches that may be helpful for this. I don’t want to make any assumptions on what you’ve tried, yet, though. Would you mind clarifying what you’ve given a go at, so that we don’t offer something that doesn’t do what you’re looking for?

Features like this exist for putting the phone back at rest when there hasn’t been a successful unlocking for X hours – GrapheneOS, an Android OS, has a similar feature. The objective is to limit the window of time an attacker has to try to exploit anything the phone may have in operation during a not-at-rest state (when the user is still ‘logged in’ to the phone, certain background services / features may be available to exploit).

Rebooting automatically, especially if the phone not has not been successfully unlocked recently, may place the phone in a less exploitable state, as those services / features might not be available without logging in first.

I am so digging this!

TrailSense, an easy to use, comprehensive wilderness tool.

The goals of the developer are fun to consider:

Goals

• Trail Sense must not use the Internet in any way, as I want the entire app usable when there is no Internet connection

• Features must provide some benefits to people using the app while hiking, in a survival situation, etc.

• Features should make use of the sensors on a phone rather than relying on stored information such as guides

• Features must be based on peer-reviewed science or be verified against real world data

Likewise, the features being developed under those goals are great for getting outside:

Features

• Designed for hiking, backpacking, camping, and geocaching
• Place beacons and navigate to them
• Follow paths
• Retrace your steps with backtrack
• Use a photo as a map
• Plan what to pack
• Be alerted before the sun sets
• Predict the weather
• Use your phone for astronomy
• And more