You don't balance rights against preferences. It's not a thing.
And your examples for that, frankly, suck because you don't understand what you're tlaking about. When someone checks my ID in person I hand it to them, they look, and then hand it back. Nothing is stored, transmitted, copied, routed, reviewed, handled, retrieved, audited, or checked. It's a simple transaction with virtually no risks. Putting anything on the internet is the exact opposite. If you don't assume it will be compromised at some point, you're....illiterate.
Also, your examples about exceptions to rights are all based on how someone's use of rights directly harms someone else. What you're advocating for isn't even remotely close to that. You're arguing that everyone's rights should be limited, arbitrarily, because some else has just ....wont do some fucking work. Comparing these issues isn't even remotely the same.
Look man, what you're advocating for is exactly why liberals get their ass handed to them all the time. You're advocating an incredibly easy to abuse law to 'protect' children from something that every parent can already do. This won't end in kids seeing less violet porn. It ends in kids not getting access to information on birth control. You're fucking stupid for not seeing this, and I have no time for your condescending bullshit when you don't actually understand the problem, the solution, the technology involved, or how people work. And as a result your solution will NEVER work (Think DARE), and instead will only harm people. But when it doesn't work, you'll demand more.
You can't say "I care about rights" but also "fuck those rights cuz people are lazy" and expect people take you seriously. Poor uptake of a perfectly good solution does not in any way, shape, or form justify infringing on the rights of others. You're conflating policy design, with rights. Again. That's not how it works. Parents can solve this problem right now, and choose not to.
You start out with "I don't care about the constitution" and move on to walking back your claims while also not understanding a word I wrote. Congrats. You're still legally, intellectually, and technologically illiterate.
This is...not a great take.
Google has always respected the Robots Exclusion Protocol. It's always been easy to stop Google from crawling and publishing your page. But, that has consequences. So claiming that these two parties are even remotely equivalent is a rather poor interpretation.
The implications spiral outward quickly. If Google succeeds here, what stops every major website from deciding they want licensing revenue from the largest scrapers? Cloudflare could put bot detection on the huge swath of the internet it serves and demand Google pay up. WordPress could do the same across its massive network. The open web—built on the assumption that published content is publicly accessible for indexing and analysis—becomes a patchwork of licensing requirements, each enforced through 1201 threats.
I'm kinda baffled at the question. The answer is "Nothing.: We can do nothing if people decide to stop Google from crawling their content. And there really shouldn't be. I don't understand how you think we should have a right to get into the relationship between two other parties.
What a fucking asinine argument, that is legally, intellectually, and technologically illiterate.
First: You're ignoring the entire premise of this article, that these laws impact others. At the end of the day, that's the problem. Nothing else fucking matters. You can't just decide that 10% of the population having their fundamental rights violated is acceptable. It's not a statistics problem, it's a rights problem.
Second: Virtually every provider offers you a switch to flip and activate some sort of filtering. MS, Apple, and Google all have tools that further restrict access on their devices. Routers offer it as well. Installable software fucking offers it. It's fucking easy to do. It's not perfection, but it's God. damned. close. It's not a technology problem, it's a rights problem.
Third: The reason parents don't do it now is because it's NOT. A. FUCKING. PROBLEM. It's just fucking not. OR they believe it's a problem and are lazy and incompetent. Neither are enough of an excuse to impact other people. It's not an ease of use problem, it's a rights problem.
Fourth: You're trying to use user-focused design principles to argue that it's OK to impact the rights of other people because shit isn't perfect. That's just a fucking dumb way to approach this. It doesn't matter how hard it is to do this, it's not a user interface problem. It's not a UI/UX problem, it's a rights problem.
If an adult is driving a car, gets in an accident, and a child is ejected because they weren't wearing a seatbelt: it's entirely the adult's fault. This is the same. If you give access to the internet to a child and don't monitor it, you're guilty of neglect. We're not going to require everyone to show their ID and check their car for kids before they start it.
I'm of the opposite opinion, the bubble bursting on AI is what will ultimately result in finding actual, successful, uses for Gen AI. We're going to be talking about data centers full of equipment you can buy for pennies on the dollar. As a result, companies and researchers with good ideas, but are less flashy, might actually get a shot at it.
At least that's my hope.
It's because they are an unending well of stupidity and greed. Most grifters have to move on because their mark gets wise or runs out of money. But not the GOP. Every time Trump shows the world how dumb they are, they take it as a challenge to be dumber.
Man, but the push to lionize him was bizarre. Like, the comments I saw posted about him were unhinged in a way that was a bit uncanny valley or something. Like you could tell it wasn't a real person behind much of it.
I'm at the point know that I just assume that every software and service that I use will be noticeably worse than the last time I interacted with it. It seems like I fight fucking everything these days. Latest one: I tried to use a Yubikey on a Chromebook and Android phone that both had a personal Gmail account and a Google workspace account in separate profiles. It took me HOURS and Google co-developed the FIDO standard with Yubi specifically to work with their workspace services. I STILl can't get the OTP feature of the Yubikey to work properly without removing and reinserting the key. And I wouldn't need to use that, but fucking nobody implements passkey or FIDO properly, so they want to send you a text message. Fuuuuck.
And I know this is massively less painful than fucking with windows.
There is no accountability in the current Republican Administration, this Republican Congress, or the Republican Supreme Court. Accountability will only come, if at all, from the next administration. And I expect the Democrats to completely fuck it up, given the opportunity, because the controlling members are Republican Lite at best.
his is not a call to violence, or approval of vigilantism. This is an acknowledgement that what Trump, the majority of Congress and the bulk of the Supreme Court are pursuing will not come to an end until enough people die that they take notice. Will it be the kids of famers dying from the abject poverty their parents ferociously pursued for them? Will it be Congress who die at the hand of the vary constitutions that voted for them? Or will it be the Justices dying in jail for the implicit corruption? I don't know. But Republicans have made it clear they are married to Trump until their blood is spilled, to the detriment of us all.
And theu back it up with exactly one study, that covers one half of one year, and that study also claims that rightwing violence was significantly worse for the last 30 years. They're beat evidence for them, is almost exclusively evidence again themselves. Again proving that MAGA is only assholes and morons.
You don't balance rights against preferences. It's not a thing. And your examples for that, frankly, suck because you don't understand what you're tlaking about. When someone checks my ID in person I hand it to them, they look, and then hand it back. Nothing is stored, transmitted, copied, routed, reviewed, handled, retrieved, audited, or checked. It's a simple transaction with virtually no risks. Putting anything on the internet is the exact opposite. If you don't assume it will be compromised at some point, you're....illiterate. Also, your examples about exceptions to rights are all based on how someone's use of rights directly harms someone else. What you're advocating for isn't even remotely close to that. You're arguing that everyone's rights should be limited, arbitrarily, because some else has just ....wont do some fucking work. Comparing these issues isn't even remotely the same. Look man, what you're advocating for is exactly why liberals get their ass handed to them all the time. You're advocating an incredibly easy to abuse law to 'protect' children from something that every parent can already do. This won't end in kids seeing less violet porn. It ends in kids not getting access to information on birth control. You're fucking stupid for not seeing this, and I have no time for your condescending bullshit when you don't actually understand the problem, the solution, the technology involved, or how people work. And as a result your solution will NEVER work (Think DARE), and instead will only harm people. But when it doesn't work, you'll demand more.
You can't say "I care about rights" but also "fuck those rights cuz people are lazy" and expect people take you seriously. Poor uptake of a perfectly good solution does not in any way, shape, or form justify infringing on the rights of others. You're conflating policy design, with rights. Again. That's not how it works. Parents can solve this problem right now, and choose not to.
You start out with "I don't care about the constitution" and move on to walking back your claims while also not understanding a word I wrote. Congrats. You're still legally, intellectually, and technologically illiterate.
This is...not a great take. Google has always respected the Robots Exclusion Protocol. It's always been easy to stop Google from crawling and publishing your page. But, that has consequences. So claiming that these two parties are even remotely equivalent is a rather poor interpretation.
I'm kinda baffled at the question. The answer is "Nothing.: We can do nothing if people decide to stop Google from crawling their content. And there really shouldn't be. I don't understand how you think we should have a right to get into the relationship between two other parties.What a fucking asinine argument, that is legally, intellectually, and technologically illiterate. First: You're ignoring the entire premise of this article, that these laws impact others. At the end of the day, that's the problem. Nothing else fucking matters. You can't just decide that 10% of the population having their fundamental rights violated is acceptable. It's not a statistics problem, it's a rights problem. Second: Virtually every provider offers you a switch to flip and activate some sort of filtering. MS, Apple, and Google all have tools that further restrict access on their devices. Routers offer it as well. Installable software fucking offers it. It's fucking easy to do. It's not perfection, but it's God. damned. close. It's not a technology problem, it's a rights problem. Third: The reason parents don't do it now is because it's NOT. A. FUCKING. PROBLEM. It's just fucking not. OR they believe it's a problem and are lazy and incompetent. Neither are enough of an excuse to impact other people. It's not an ease of use problem, it's a rights problem. Fourth: You're trying to use user-focused design principles to argue that it's OK to impact the rights of other people because shit isn't perfect. That's just a fucking dumb way to approach this. It doesn't matter how hard it is to do this, it's not a user interface problem. It's not a UI/UX problem, it's a rights problem. If an adult is driving a car, gets in an accident, and a child is ejected because they weren't wearing a seatbelt: it's entirely the adult's fault. This is the same. If you give access to the internet to a child and don't monitor it, you're guilty of neglect. We're not going to require everyone to show their ID and check their car for kids before they start it.
What a fucking lazy parent. Kid's don't have to watch that, they only do because you fucking suck at parenting.
I'm of the opposite opinion, the bubble bursting on AI is what will ultimately result in finding actual, successful, uses for Gen AI. We're going to be talking about data centers full of equipment you can buy for pennies on the dollar. As a result, companies and researchers with good ideas, but are less flashy, might actually get a shot at it. At least that's my hope.
It's because they are an unending well of stupidity and greed. Most grifters have to move on because their mark gets wise or runs out of money. But not the GOP. Every time Trump shows the world how dumb they are, they take it as a challenge to be dumber.
Congrats Democrats, you somehow got outsmarted by the stupidest fucking people.
Man, but the push to lionize him was bizarre. Like, the comments I saw posted about him were unhinged in a way that was a bit uncanny valley or something. Like you could tell it wasn't a real person behind much of it.
I'm at the point know that I just assume that every software and service that I use will be noticeably worse than the last time I interacted with it. It seems like I fight fucking everything these days. Latest one: I tried to use a Yubikey on a Chromebook and Android phone that both had a personal Gmail account and a Google workspace account in separate profiles. It took me HOURS and Google co-developed the FIDO standard with Yubi specifically to work with their workspace services. I STILl can't get the OTP feature of the Yubikey to work properly without removing and reinserting the key. And I wouldn't need to use that, but fucking nobody implements passkey or FIDO properly, so they want to send you a text message. Fuuuuck. And I know this is massively less painful than fucking with windows.
God no. Insurance will drop the vaccine from coverage, and then make it's administration a prerequisite for coverage of liver cancer treatment.
We have to have risen to the level of criminality now, right?
Forgiveness is what the Baileys would want.
I, just, assumed this happened at the time. Now we no concretely, and Trump/Tate bung lickers won't change their minds a bit.
There is no accountability in the current Republican Administration, this Republican Congress, or the Republican Supreme Court. Accountability will only come, if at all, from the next administration. And I expect the Democrats to completely fuck it up, given the opportunity, because the controlling members are Republican Lite at best. his is not a call to violence, or approval of vigilantism. This is an acknowledgement that what Trump, the majority of Congress and the bulk of the Supreme Court are pursuing will not come to an end until enough people die that they take notice. Will it be the kids of famers dying from the abject poverty their parents ferociously pursued for them? Will it be Congress who die at the hand of the vary constitutions that voted for them? Or will it be the Justices dying in jail for the implicit corruption? I don't know. But Republicans have made it clear they are married to Trump until their blood is spilled, to the detriment of us all.
Man, I hope it fucking KILLs Roberts every time he prostrates himself to this administration. It probably doesn't, but I can hope.
As someone in the utilities industry, the comment about monopolies rings true. There should be no for profit utility. Munis or CoOps only.
And theu back it up with exactly one study, that covers one half of one year, and that study also claims that rightwing violence was significantly worse for the last 30 years. They're beat evidence for them, is almost exclusively evidence again themselves. Again proving that MAGA is only assholes and morons.
Exactly. Republicans hate, and kill, other Republicans more than Democrats hate or kill Republicans.