Amju Wolf

By definition if inflation doubles and the value of your estate doesn’t change, your actual wealth didn’t change.

Why did you cross post this? It’s already a thread.

That’s just the reality of doing business on the Internet.

That’s just not true. You can absolutely get by on the internet remaining pretty much anonymous, as it is. Very few services need (and verify) your personal data; when they do it’s basically always when it’s government-mandated, and it’s for things that have a “physical” equivalent.

i.e. creating a bank account online requires your actual ID, but so it would if you tried to do it “offline” in a physical bank (and you largely have a choice on whether or not you do it online).

Then you have stuff like online shopping and such where most people probably use their actual personal information but you don’t have to and it’s generally not checked.

This is an unprecedented change, where suddenly for access to a free service someone needs to ask for and validate some very private details. And it fucking sucks.

While Australia’s new legislation is ham-fisted and poorly thought out, the intent isn’t wrong and there’s broad consensus for it (77% approval in Australia). We need to do something about the uncontrolled exploitation, manipulation and endangerment of minors by social media services.

That’s the issue though; I agree that something needs to be done, but you need to do it more or less correctly on the first try or you’ll probably make it even worse.

What you’re exercising here is called whataboutism, and it’s a really shitty thing to do.

Someone still needs to create that digital token from your ID, which means someone’s still using and storing your data, and potentially selling it or having it leaked.

Who would realistically buy Chrome that wouldn’t degrade the consumer experience?

Hopefully noone, so it would lead into more fragmentation in the browser space, which is a good things.

The manifest v3 changes primary give a lot of security and privacy changes that stop extensions from doing a lot of questionable things in the background on all your page you visit. But that does stop ad blockers from doing a lot of what they currently do - blocking in page elements and modifying the pages you visit.

It also killed a lot of other genuinely useful extensions.

And if security is their main concern they should have spent resources on making sure the extensions they themselves redistribute are safe, not on killing a huge chunk of extensions. Sorry but you’ll have a very hard time convincing anyone that getting rid of ad blockers wasn’t their primary motive.

But it does not block them from blocking page requests so ad blockers like ublockorigin lite can still function in a more limited capacity to block ads.

It completely changed how they do this, and made it way less effective and more limited. All completely unnecessary from a security standpoint.

Nah, not if it’s corporations or whole countries.

Algorithmic patents amount to patenting maths which, by very longstanding precedence, is not a thing, for good reason.

You absolutely can patent “math” (well, more like physics) IRL. What matters though is that the invention actually has to be novel and non-obvious, and IMO it should also be harder to patent if it’s in a segment like software where costs of development, iteration and “research” are generally extremely cheap. Like, it should have a way higher bar for the “novelness”.

And I would not allow any kind of software design patent (use copyright or trademark to protect that).

…and that’s how it still works.

Considering those scanners usually register as keyboards and just do a dumb input “typing” it shouldn’t even be hard, lol.

The worst part would probably be picking a barcode scheme where the inputs make sense…

Protest votes are fucking stupid. They accomplish nothing. I will vote to keep trump out of office.

So you are voting in protest to Trump? :D Because that’s literally what you described.

Ah yes because the last ten times they did this it totally didn’t backfire and they had everyone else’s future in mind while selflessly giving up a lot of their own.

Oh wait…

Also, this isn’t even compatible with copyright law in some countries. I.e here you can’t give up authorship at all; you can only grant an irrevocable, perpetual license (that might even prohibit you from distribution yourself and such) but you’ll always be able to say “I made this” no matter what their license says.

Quite the irony; somehow not doing anything and getting people killed needlessly and destroying your own nation is an okay path forward, but trying to find a compromise that stops that would cost you your career… I mean, it’s not surprising, but also really sad.

Sooo they can bend the law and postpone holding elections, but they cannot bend it to hold peace talks? It’s just an excuse.

That sounds very illegal, yeah. You can’t advertise a price and then charge something different. It doesn’t matter that the person didn’t notice it. At that point you might not have price tags at all (which is also illegal, just FYI).

For all the hate PHP gets (or used to get) it’s ecosystem is amazing. And so is the language and standard library itself for the most part. It still inherits some of the original issues, but a lot of work has been done to minimize them.

It’s funny because despite all the fearmongering about Microsoft’s Github acquisition it feels like it only improved since then, while Gitlab has done a shitton of questionable and shitty decisions, a ton of critical security issues and in general feels like (at best) they don’t know what they are doing.

The only thing Gitlab has going for itself is that it’s self-hostable, but they still retain a large amount of control.

It generates code and then you can use a call to some runtime execution API to run that code, completely separate from the neural network.