Manuel_D

18 ms·

421.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
No? Hitler explicitly laid out a plan to expel and starve much of Eastern Europe.
422.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
Is suspect large trucks may eventually move to hydrogen, but smaller passenger vehicles will stay on batteries. The nature of hydrogen containment favors larger capacity, on account of better volume to surface area ratios.
423.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
The value proposition of hydrogen is energy density. Batteries have low energy per unit of volume and awful energy density by unit of mass. You will never, ever, fly across the Pacific on a battery powered aircraft. Transoceanic shipping is
424.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
Solar doesn't work well with 24/7 demand requirements, provisioning enough storage to fully even out intermittency drastically raises costs (most battery storage systems are for only 2-4 hours). Nuclear has extremely onerous regul
425.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
Since when are warrants required for footage of people in public? Does a red light camera need a judge's warrant before it snaps a photos of a car running the light?
426.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
What evidence to the contrary? 1% of the US population does commit over 60% of violent crime: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3969807/
427.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
Those book "bans" are just librarians' decision on what to use finite shelf space to stock. Students are 100% free to bring any of the "banned" books to school and read them. By this logic, when a librarian changes
428.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
When has the US ever banned students from reading certain books or research papers? What research papers can I not legally read? The domains of shadow libraries are banned for copyright infringement, you can still read the books legally by
429.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
As you point out, this is a proposed amendment to an already existing law. > The government said: "Plans are currently being considered by Ofcom for these kinds of images to be treated with the same severity as child sexual abuse an
430.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
The law doesn't stipulate that the offending images have to be posted with the intent to shame or embarrass, nor that the images have to be sent directly to the person that's supposed to be depicted in the image. If that's th
431.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
In the case of revenge porn, there's an image of a real person. By contrast, fictional content doesn't affect actually show a real person, so any attempt to prohibit fictional revenge porn must target images that merely look simil
432.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
> Then they'll try to convince the authorities that the image is of them, and presumably mostly fail although in some cases they may succeed. How will the government determine which images fail or succeed this claim?
433.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
> A birthmark you don't have or a different eye color obviously do not make a fictionalized image become "not you" because they would not reduce the violation you'd feel. What if someone claims to feel violated by an
434.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
Imagine dang wrote a script to delete every HN comment that contains the string "velociraptor". Under your logic, this involves surveiling every HN commenter. This is true in the pedantic sense that every comment posted to the sit
435.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
On the one hand, micro mobility is a great way to reduce emissions, traffic, and parking congestion. It'd really suck to see it become more difficult to get around with electric bikes and scooters. On the other hand, so many people I k
436.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
As bad as I think this law is, this isn't demanding any degree of surveillance in the sense that real human beings have their information or activity tracked. This is mandating taking down content, not surveiling anyone.
437.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
What qualifies as an "intimate image"? A photo of someone in a swimsuit at the beach? Fictional content is also covered by this law. How do we determine what fictional content counts as an intimate image of a real person? What if
438.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
The issue is that if you need to achieve 0% false negatives, you're going to get a lot of false positives.
439.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
At this point you've stopped attempting to argue that banking's information collection requirements is "avoiding" the law, and instead have pivoted to speculation about whether the Supreme Court might reinterpret the Con
440.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
Regardless of how wrong the 5th circuit decision was in this case, the point was just to highlight that the law doesn't allow the government to circumvent restrictions by going through a third party. Clearly this particular case trigge
441.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
Regardless of the subsequent lifting of the order, it still illustrates that the government cannot make private parties carry out illegal acts on its behalf. If anything, the fact that the circuit's decision was later overturned shows
442.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
Companies that exist in the US don't have to obey EU laws. For instance the UK tried to tell 4chan that it needs to obey the UK Online Safety Act, and 4chan replied with, essentially, "fuck off". Companies that try to do busi
443.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
Groups did sue after the Bank Secrecy Act, and the cases went all the way to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court determined that it did not violate the constitution: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_Secrecy_Act >
444.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
> Clearly the government would love to just take all your information directly when you open an account, as that would be even better for them, but due to the 4th amendment they can't do that This is just factually wrong. The Bank
445.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
Right, but the point is, no law is being avoided. The comment I responded to wrote: > Always easier when you can avoid the law and just buy it off the shelf. (Emphasis mine) No law is being avoided, neither in your banking example nor
446.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
> average citizens can be held responsible for the actions of their government, to the point that they are valid military targets. What do you mean by this? If a government conscripts "average citizens" into its military then t
447.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
The government doesn't need a warrant to access bank records, as per the US's banking laws. They just need an administrative subpoena, which doesn't have to be signed off by a judge. This is not and example of the government
448.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
That's not how the law works in the US. The government cannot have a third party take action on its behalf to do something that would be illegal for the government to do itself. This is why the Biden administration had a restraining or
449.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
Again, if you want to allege that these other people are white supremacists go right ahead. But you wrote that "Clearview AI was founded by white supremacists". Even after your new set of links, this remains unsubstantiated. None
450.
by Manuel_D 8mo ago
None of your links allege that Hoan Ton-That or Richard Schwartz is a white supremacist. What the Huffington Post piece does allege, is that for 3 weeks Smartcheckr (a different LLC that would later have its assets transferred to Clearview

More ›