Hizonner

21 ms·

361.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
Um, no, it attempts to compel foreign banks, which may not even have a presence in the US, to disclose information about US citizens, using various threats. It doesn't threaten to throw foreigners in jail , but it does threaten to use
362.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
> It's a matter of UK law and, I'd bet, many countries, that they have the sovereign right to legislate about matters in and outside their borders. Basically all countries take that position legally. But there are norms and cus
363.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
The US will enforce most UK court judgements. I'm not sure how administrative fines work; there might be a need to involve a court first, but once that's done the US will [on edit- may] enforce them. The US will not enforce UK
364.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
> Internet but not for any other commerce. If you sell products to someone in the EU, you are liable to EU laws about that product category and commercial activity. The internet is the only exception, and that has caused a lot of problem
365.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
First of all, this is about Web sites, and that's not a valid analogy. Web sites don't spontaneously send you letters, let alone kidnap you. You only get content you actively asked for. Second, where is the person writing the le
366.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
A government can claim jurisdiction over anything worldwide. A different government can disagree. The two may negotiate over that, in which case common sense ideas like "they didn't do it in your territory" may make one sid
367.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
There's no sign that Ofcom wouldn't want to treat user lies as the site's problem. I suspect they would .
368.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
They don't agree that it is a public safety matter, or at least they've clearly taken the position that they don't care about that kind of public safety. He's just pointing out that Ofcom's behavior is inconsisten
369.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
> no internet regulation can hold for any subject No Internet regulation can hold extraterritorially . You leave out the obvious and most important case: the country where the Web site or whatever is located enforcing its own laws. Whic
370.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
So you like it when the US does it, and want to encourage more of it worldwide?
371.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
> I don’t agree that choosing to host a website without limiting the audience is innocent. "Innocent"? That's a strange word to choose. Who cares what's "innocent"? > It’s a choice, and has been the defau
372.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
The criticism is that it exists, which invites abuse. Being more accurate would be worse.
373.
by Hizonner 11mo ago
You shouldn't even be expected to geoblock. If I'm operating a Web site in country A, I should not have to care about country B's laws unless I am taking specific action intended to attract users in country B in particular .
374.
by Hizonner 1y ago
Well, sort of. Anybody who's deployed, or suggested deploying, such snake oil, should become unemployable.
375.
by Hizonner 1y ago
This feels like something that should not exist, period. For any email important enough to actually send, asking people to guess what a single-emoji "reaction" actually means is a recipe for bad communication.
376.
by Hizonner 1y ago
... or stop using browsers that install malware just because you visited a malicious site...
377.
by Hizonner 1y ago
> I mean it is no secret a lot of people who produce these things have mental health issues Really? In my experience, people who think they should be in charge of the interests of "civilization", or who are obsessed with other
378.
by Hizonner 1y ago
> There were so many people saying that this isn’t going to work. Yes, and we were right. It was billed as something that most adults would accept. It's not plausible that 77 percent of Pornhub's UK traffic came from non-adults
379.
by Hizonner 1y ago
> It used to be cv dazzle [0] is 15 years young. But its questionable if it works anymore. I fed all the CV Dazzle demo pictures into some free Amazon facial recognition demo a few years ago. It was a pretty shitty demo, but the makeup d
380.
by Hizonner 1y ago
There should be a bounty pool for the person who can get ICE to do the most stupid, embarrassing thing based on "social media" chaff.
381.
by Hizonner 1y ago
> The UK's Online Safety Act requires website owners to verify ages but it doesn't prescribe specific methods for doing so. ... and just ignores the fact that there are no sane or remotely appropriate ways to implement that. As
382.
by Hizonner 1y ago
How about "Then Ofcom fucks off, and the Government apologizes for its stupidity and moves to repeal the OSA"?
383.
by Hizonner 1y ago
How about "Is the earth flat", or "Are the voices in Joe Blow's head real?"? Both have nonzero support. Should the LLM have a concomitant chance of answering "yes"?
384.
by Hizonner 1y ago
Appealing, but does it apply if the user is planning to nerve-gas the subway?
385.
by Hizonner 1y ago
> Not everything is 33/33/33. It's not even clear that abortion should be. It obviously should not be, and almost nobody thinks it should . There may be disagreement over what it should be... but nobody sane thinks it
386.
by Hizonner 1y ago
Does that also apply to sampling it 100 times over whether armed robbery should be legal? And flower arranging? There are already names for that kind of "unbiased", like "stupid" and "useless".
387.
by Hizonner 1y ago
If you were talking about Apple or Google, you might have a point, although you would be better off to talk about "freedom of speech", since "the First Amendment" refers to a very specific piece of legal text (and one th
388.
by Hizonner 1y ago
I honestly cannot figure out what you are trying to say here. I don't think you can either. Nobody is throwing anybody in prison, nor threatening to. One of the reasons the First Amendment applies only to the government is that, unlike
389.
by Hizonner 1y ago
The First Amendment does not apply to fucking app stores. It applies to the government and only to the government. That does include the government leaning on people, but it does not include editorial or curation decisions made by totally
390.
by Hizonner 1y ago
> new testament scripture about slavery: https://www.google.com/search?q=new+testament+scripture+abou ... Posting Google searches as references is pretty lame. The New Testament clearly condones slavery, but I think all

More ›