xp84

15 ms·

301.
by xp84 2mo ago
How exactly would this bill, as written, affect you? Would you indicate that you're a child when you set up your device? If not, you're arguing with a strawman version of the bill, I'm guessing one that imposes verification
302.
by xp84 2mo ago
Hi there, webstrand@Webstrands-MacBook-Pro.local - we meet again!
303.
by xp84 2mo ago
> if there was age verification built in? well, actual verification isn't even on the table in Illinois so that's quite a hypothetical. But anyway, since you'll always retain the right to not give a device (which, btw I
304.
by xp84 2mo ago
How is it a punishment to that first group? If you like the status quo, there's no impact to you if you just set the DOB to 1/1/1999. Or are you waiting for some science-fiction proposal that will be completely perfect, which
305.
by xp84 2mo ago
Hear, hear. I could even argue that the dearth of "skilled political operators" and "passionate orators" - at least excluding the ones that seem to be under exclusive contract to the Devil himself - is maybe the worst pa
306.
by xp84 2mo ago
> a German court recently held Google liable for false statements generated by its AI overview feature. The case arose after Google’s AI wrongly linked two publishing companies to scammy business practices. Because the search engine extr
307.
by xp84 2mo ago
Yes, for instance it could be useful if someone’s been accidentally committing with a bogus email address. Or if you’re cleaning up some sort of mess and would like to recreate an accurate history. Obviously as with any “force push” situati
308.
by xp84 2mo ago
I have to agree with your overall take (only caveat being that I know too little about hardware to know if it's well-founded). The incentives are such that if it's possible to make hardware that's cryptographically locked int
309.
by xp84 2mo ago
> given the number of stories of parents who seem to hand their children their credit card, then complain about them racking up thousands of dollars on Roblox or whatever Sure, but you hear about those because of how shocking they are to
310.
by xp84 2mo ago
I use them. First of all, they're still absolute dogshit (but Apple promises good changes in next OS?). And the choice is to either allow social media in its current, extremely toxic form, or ban it entirely. There's no "Allo
311.
by xp84 2mo ago
This sounds like a hot take, but I'm way less concerned with sketchy porn sites (mostly for the kind of reasons you say which boil down to ... they're sketchy). I'm more concerned with deliberate manipulation of young people
312.
by xp84 2mo ago
Shrinkflation is to me the best example of why pure short-term-ism is a cancer. The first jackass to do it, say by taking a soup can of 16 ounces and adjusting it to 15.75oz, it boosted the profits that quarter. Mathematically, we could kee
313.
by xp84 2mo ago
OP didn't say any chain, so his argument is technically not falsifiable, but that also makes it incredibly dubious.
314.
by xp84 2mo ago
Your Step 2 assumes complete idiot parents. Parents who hand their kids a new device without adding any parental controls (A) are already in the minority today - I know a lot of parents and none of us would do that, and (B) can't be
315.
by xp84 2mo ago
> then I can configure my kids' devices to disallow that C'mon. We all know parents are far more likely to tap "OK" for "Allow personalized social feeds?" than they are to knowingly falsify their kids'
316.
by xp84 2mo ago
Great, let's legalize recreational fentanyl too, since 'whatever people seem to like' is good for society. In this case, unless you're a child, nobody's trying to control what content you consume. And if you are a p
317.
by xp84 2mo ago
Can you back that up? > Step 2: 'oh look at all these people bypassing the law. It's so simple for a child to watch porn with this.' This would be a demonstrably stupid argument. A parent who simply opens the box and does
318.
by xp84 2mo ago
Exactly. Fortunately, the kids we're most concerned with - young ones who just want to access their brainrot - has very little overlap with Linux users anyway. So, while I hate this hysterical propaganda portrayal as "aGe vErIfIcA
319.
by xp84 2mo ago
Or alternatively - you could recognize that normal people are getting more and more pissed off by the fact that social media companies are force-feeding garbage into their kids eyeballs 16 hours a day. We could give them a reasonable soluti
320.
by xp84 2mo ago
What? The GP comment is one single line which states that it just "will" happen.
321.
by xp84 2mo ago
Hard agree. I don't think we allowed video store operators in 1995 to just let kids wander into the back room and rent porn, but we're so used to there just being "no rules" online, it is coming as a massive shock now wh
322.
by xp84 2mo ago
Re: your last paragraph I actually agree with you, if you mandate that the site has to look for an affirmative signal and if it doesn't get one, has to assume the user is the youngest possible age group. Users would demand the proper s
323.
by xp84 2mo ago
Why then did this completely leave out verification? Parents want and accept the out-of-box declaration idea. It requires no ID, no face scans, no "ID dot ME" or whatever. As parents we are more than able to open the box before gi
324.
by xp84 2mo ago
Did you read the law? It actually imposes very (in my humble opinion) good rules on the content providers, specifically social media. We know why social media is addictive - the personalized feeds are highly optimized to extend usage time,
325.
by xp84 2mo ago
Serious question: This is a out-of-box "ask for age" requirement. No one is "verifying" anything. Why are we using this misleading headline? Face scans, ID cards, all that stuff that makes everyone nervous, are specifica
326.
by xp84 2mo ago
That's why crap companies like Dreyers mostly doesn't sell it anymore, they sell "Frozen Dairy Dessert" in fine print but with giant ice-cream-evocative words above it.
327.
by xp84 2mo ago
The burger patties were absolutely not 1/8 pound. I can assure you from experience as a Professional McDonald's Worker in 2003 that those were 10:1 patties then as well. I can also vouch for the same from another major burger chai
328.
by xp84 2mo ago
Let's just take a moment to appreciate the weasel who wrote this utter trash response. From the article: > A Mars spokesperson said: "Over the last 35 years, we have made a number of updates to our bar sizes and pack formats to
329.
by xp84 2mo ago
This just means you’ve accepted URLs as something different than they were made to be. If the resource no longer exists - fine, c’est la vie. Otherwise, there should never be any need for it to change. It should never have encoded any imple
330.
by xp84 2mo ago
This is exactly correct ^ and I’m not even aligned with Democrats. There’s no end to the ego and butt-hurt of that man, and conversely, he’s the easiest to exploit via flattery of anyone I’ve ever heard of.

More ›