Tiny caveat: If the “windows tax” is less than the cost of building the device by parts – which it might be – then buying a new XBox Series X 360 Box X Box 360 One and installing linux on it might be a cost savings for a consumer… assuming no signed OS fuckery.

The fun part is that these cameras are not owned, operated or property of your local jurisdiction. They are hardware/software as a service. IANAL, but I think Flock would have to sue you.

I have not personally de-flocked anything, but my local area doesn’t have any that aren’t tied to a business parking lot.

If some show up, I can’t imagine a 5 minute walk with a hat, face mask and a can of spraypaint wouldn’t be sufficient to disable one without risk. Might need a stool.

Agreed. For anyone not already following Louis Rossmann, he’s a right-to-repair guy on an anti-surveilance arc and is always posting good information that will make you seethe.

His city tried to buy Flock cameras and he organized enough resistance that they cancelled… but then they are trying again a while later, assuming the scrutiny is off: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3MiLiQ6olkI

Ring will do the same thing.

Microslop, Meta, Google, et al will get their hands slapped when they are too proud about how they are fucking you, and then will issue a retraction, but only long enough to let the anger die out before doing it again more quietly.

I hear that. My local ABC store doesn’t scan my ID, though I don’t see a future where they don’t eventually scan every time; and my local grocery store scans occasionally, but not always.

I can’t just not buy age-verified products, though, because sometimes it’s cold medicine or a prescription. **

Back to the original thread, this is not a Discord problem, this is a privacy problem. We need to push back on data capture in general and tell legislators that privacy is important to all people, even those who buy booze.

** could we make little sneaky stickers that obfuscate the barcode enough to prevent it scanning? The cashier would likely revert to visual inspection without the data retention: face matches photo, age is good, override.

This is one of the real root causes of enshittification, particularly around privacy.

Once a product is profitable, the profit needs to be protected. That’s not really a slight against it, just a reality of capitalism. Those developers expect their jobs to persist. Middle management probably wants to keep those developers on staff. C-suite needs number-go-up to keep their jobs (fuck them, but if number-go-down then other people lose their jobs too). Adhering to regulations limits the risk of the government suing the company to oblivion.

Discord has been big enough for a while that it needs to be aware of the legal and political landscape in order to survive. This is just them limiting their risk. It will cost them customers – sort of: I’m gone, and have been since September when they updated their TOS, but I’ve also never given them any money and I’ve never seen an ad other than theirs. I’ve been nothing but a cost, so maybe good riddance?

Discord is not the enemy here. The enemy is congress/parliament and the power grabs they keep enacting. Big Tech has captured our governments and wants our data. The ‘for the children’ angle is such a trope that everyone who isn’t a potato can see through it, and we need to tell our leaders that this isn’t acceptable.

The parenting aspect is a red herring. Nothing about these policies is really to ‘protect the children’. The big tech groups have figured out that they can gate-keep … everything… and require your pii/data to get to it; and that many/most people will give up that data to keep access to their content.

That said, teaching your children about the importance of privacy is becoming as important as teaching them about other harmful online content. “Don’t trust a Nigerian prince, let me know if you’re being bullied, don’t watch porn* and don’t scan your face to get on discord”

* until you’re 18-ish, at which point go nuts, just know it’s all fake.

so… you do want face verification for online interactions?

Did you sneak around and do things you were told not to? Probably.

While doing so, did you have the context that you shouldn’t do it? Maybe. Sometimes the learning happens when you get caught, get hurt or have other consequences.

Sure, the answer is education. Tell them that they shouldn’t do <thing> and why. Hopefully, the guilt/shame/pain of doing the thing they know is incorrect will be enough of a deterrent, but adults are fallible and kids cannot be expected to be better at it than adults who also have vices they know intellectually are bad. I don’t want to “completely control” my children, but I do want to prevent harm. Same way we put guard rails at the edge of a cliff.

Just to be clear:

Oh god, they’ll get some access? Like, I can’t completely control my children and they are individuals who have the right to start making choices? Jesus Christ, I’m not going to be able to exert my will over them indefinitely?

Are you recommending that we just sit back and let kids random-walk through tiktok? At what age should algorithm-dopamine-drug-app be allowed? There are studies out there showing that this stuff is harmful to ADULTS and this thread is about known impacts on kids. We prevent kids from smoking or drinking. Why do you think preventing access to social media like this is a step too far?

There’s also a question of age. I’m talking as a parent of a pre-teen. I need these controls where I can get them because the internet is a dopamine machine. It’s a real challenge to limit access to it and my kid isn’t prepared to stop watching tiktok the same way they aren’t prepared to stop eating candy. I can physically limit the candy in the house, but guess where I find rogue candy wrappers? Maybe by the time they are 15, I’ll have taken the training-wheels off, in which case we probably agree.

Finally, there’s an additional context for parents that is cultural context: My kid has never watched squidgames, five nights at freddy’s or stranger things. Many, maybe even most, of his peers have, and that leaves him out of those conversations. There are threads up in this post that haunt me: Am I preventing my child from being able to socialize because I won’t let them play/watch <content> that I think is unacceptable? I don’t want roblox, fortnight, or predatorily-monitized games in my kid’s hands until they are ready.

I recently relented on fortnight. My kid spent about $20 of their money on skins and a battle pass. I asked them recently if it was worth it. They said, “no”. I also recently let them create a roblox account. It took about 2 hours for them to determine the whole game was dumb. I think I’m a good parent.

No shit. I now work from home, but my last cubicle was half that size and had no walls. That’s a god damn luxury cube!

The real problem is that “will you go get a decent candidate.”

There’s rot in the dnc for sure, but if you are not actively trying to fix it then why expect someone else to find your perfect candidate?

You need to be active locally. Precinct, county, district, state, national. If anyone misbehaves, you can ‘lobby’ against them at your precinct level and sway a county vote, etc, until they are not re elected.

These are those superdelegates we talked about so much in 2016.

Don’t wait for a better candidate, make one.

Perfect. And then later, “I hope you enjoyed your glue pizza. We don’t have enough fuel to reach Paris or return to land. This plane has no emergency beacon or flotation devices and is about to “land” in the ocean. Sorry for the inconvenience!”

I wish him to sleep in a bed made by AI. Eat a meal made by AI. And then take a flight in a plane made and pulled by AI.

You didn’t take away the point MrMakabar (I think) wanted to make.

Most of us live in a world where we have to go to a grocery store and buy food. I cannot possibly be expected to research the CEO of every product I buy and even if I did, my choices are limited to what is available in my store(s).

When I learn of a company doing bad things, I shun them. But there are also conglomerates like nestle that own half the brands in my local store and I can’t really avoid them. I “have to exist in this system whether [I] like it or not.”

Makabar was not supporting buying nike or supporting fascism, but was instead telling you to not blame your peers in the “lower classes” for the issue – those who might buy a shoe without knowing the CEO is fascist, or in some cases still buying crackers from a company they do know is fascist because they have no choice.

Instead, be mad at the fucking fascists. “Turn your justifiably angry energy upwards…” is the part of the quote above that you seem to have missed.

That was my body language cue. An ‘umm… 😅’ answer is a pass, as well as any attempt to actually integrate disparate tools that doesn’t sound like it’s being read. The creased eyebrows, hesitation, wtf face, etc is the proof that the interviewee has domain knowledge and knows the question is wrong.

I do think the tools need to be tailored to the position. My example may not have been the best. I’m not a professional front end developer, but that was my theoretical job for the interviewee.

I’m not in a hiring position, but my take would be to throw in unrelated tools as a question. E.g. “how would you use powershell in this html to improve browser performance?” A human would go what the fuck? A llm will confidently make shit up.

I’d probably immediately follow that with a comment to lower the interviewee’s blood pressure like, ‘you wouldn’t believe how many people try to answer that question with a llm’. A solid hire might actually come up with something, but you should be able to tell from their delivery if they are just reading llm output or are inspired by the question.

And this is why Digit wanted a clarification. Let’s make a quick split between “Tech Bro” and Technology Enthusiast.

I’d maybe label myself a “tech guy”, and forego the “bro”, but I could see other people calling me a “tech bro”. I like following tech trends and innovations, and I’m often a leading adopter of things I’m interested in if not bleeding edge. I like talking about tech trends and will dive into subjects I know. I’ll be quick to point out how machine learning can be used in certain circumstances, but am loudly against “AI”/LLMs being shoved into everything. I’m not the CEO or similar of a startup.

Your specific and linked definition requires low critical thinking skills, big ego and access to “too much” money. That doesn’t describe me and probably doesn’t describe Digit’s network.

Their whole point seemed to be that the tech-aware people in their sphere are antagonistic to the idea of “AI” being added to everything. That doesn’t deserve derision.

Yeah:

“The most hurtful thing (Trump) said, which is absolutely untrue, is he called me a traitor, and that is so extremely wrong,” Greene said, “and those are the types of words used that can radicalize people against me and put my life in danger.”

Despite her vitriol having put tons of other peoples’ lives or at lest livelihoods in danger, she seems to want to change when it’s aimed at her.

fucking traitor (to the US).

Similarly, every time he says something stupid like, ’ I don’t even know the guy…’ that should invalidate a pardon.

Hell, I don’t submit help requests without a confident understanding of what’s wrong.

Hi Amazon. My cart, ID xyz123, failed to check out. Your browser javascript seems to be throwing an error on line 173 of “null is not an object”. I think this is because the variable is overwritten in line 124, but only when the number of items AND the total cart price are prime.

Generally, by the time I have my full support request, I have either solved my problem or solved theirs.

I agree that this is a problem.

“Responsible disclosure” is a thing where an organization is given time to fix their code and deploy before the vulnerability is made public. Failing to fix the issue in a reasonable time, especially a timeline that your org has publicly agreed to, will cause reputational harm and is thus an incentive to write good code that is free of vulns and to remediate ones when they are identified.

This breaks down when the “organization” in question is just a few people with some free time who made something so fundamentally awesome that the world depends on it and have never been compensated for their incredible contributions to everyone.

“Responsible disclosure” in this case needs a bit of a redesign when the org is volunteer work instead of a company making profit. There’s no real reputational harm to ffmpeg, since users don’t necessarily know they use it, but the broader community recognizes the risk, and the maintainers feel obligated to fix issues. Additionally, a publicly disclosed vulnerability puts tons of innocent users at risk.

I don’t dislike AI-based code analysis. It can theoretically prevent zero-days when someone malicious else finds an issue first, but running AI tools against that xkcd-tiny-block and expecting that the maintainers have the ability to fit into a billion-dollar-company’s timeline is unreasonable. Google et al. should keep risks or vulnerabilities private when disclosing them to FOSS maintainers instead of holding them to the same standard as a corporation by posting issues to a git repo.

A RCE or similar critical issue in ffmpeg would be a real issue with widespread impact, given how broadly it is used. That suggests that it should be broadly supported. The social contract with LGPL, GPL, and FOSS in general is that code is released ‘as is, with no warranty’. Want to fix a problem, go for it! Only calling out problem just makes you a dick: Google, Amazon, Microsoft, 100’s of others.

As many have already stated: If a grossly profitable business depends on a “tiny” piece of code they aren’t paying for, they have two options: pay for the code (fund maintenance) or make their own. I’d also support a few headlines like “New Google Chrome vulnerability will let hackers steal you children and house!” or “watching this youtube video will set your computer on fire!”