The big given example was gigabit throughput. Most consumers in the US, businesses included, don’t have access to internet infrastructure capable of multigig because of regulatory capture. Those that do are already using multigig hardware which, unsurprisingly, hasn’t really changed much.

You’re saying the same thing as the top of the thread. All of this is for now. At some point it could be advantageous for Apple to stop resisting US demands. It is important to understand and prepare for that while also accepting, for now, Apple provides the most corporate privacy of the corporate privacy options in the US.

1. This is actually a privacy problem. If any company can access the live feed, it opens up serious surveillance issues. Granted, we have to trust Apple won’t surveil…
2. I agree
3. This has more to do with content moderation than prudishness. If you’re being held accountable for what kids can access on your platform, you take a very draconian approach. Granted, no one is yelling at Dell for allowing Steam to install porn games…

Don’t forget the ability of major actors to rewrite history, making these blockchains incredibly centralized and absolutely mutable. If someone with enough clout decides to roll something back, it happens.

This isn’t recent. This has been an ongoing thing for at least 20 years (if not longer; that’s just the earliest I remember having this convo). Yes, it cleans the wound by killing things but it also fucks up the healthy tissue around the wound (see other comments for a more scientific explanation). Having some in a medical kit is useful for other activities such as diluting with water for an ear rinse, diluting with water for various mouth stuff (rinse not swallow), and some skin treatments (again, diluting first).

California is not Colorado nor is it federal. I don’t think you understand the things you’re saying since you don’t seem to grasp, as you put it, the regulations are “often state-specific.” You linked California, not Colorado, which this article is in reference to. Even in the beginning, you didn’t seem to grasp why regulation and some level of understanding about what people should or shouldn’t do is reasonable to have defined. Good luck!

In the US? I’m gonna need to see some statutes there bud. Last I checked there are no federal requirements and as far as I can tell there are only insurance requirements in Colorado at the moment.

1. What about ride share companies that aren’t Uber or Lyft that don’t have safety programs?
2. What requirement do Uber or Lyft have to maintain good safety after, say, they own the market?

Your last sentence is somewhat naive. It can often place the onus on the wrong group. People don’t want to engage with the XLibre dude with open minds and empathy any more because back when they did, he didn’t engage with an open mind or empathy. You can only do that for so long before you have to isolate and protect. Quarantine, deplatforming, and isolation works when someone refuses to engage. At some point you have to be intolerant of intolerance if you want to get anything done.

Scope some literature on deradicalization. There is only so much empathy you can give someone who thinks an entire group of people don’t deserve to be human and, more importantly, there has to be a cutoff when you’re not getting empathy back. You’re right, empathy and an attempt to understand is important. Don’t forget many people in marginalized or attacked groups have to defend their existence every single fucking day so sometimes their empathy is pretty drained.

See‽ Easy explanation. I get it, absolutely reasonable issues, and one of several areas Linux just isn’t great with. “Too many issues to explain here” doesn’t click with me.

This rings a little hollow to me. Most of the people I know that understand Linux can quickly summarize why they might not use it as their daily driver (eg staying on macOS for graphics/video or staying on Windows for desktop Word/Excel). If you can’t summarize that quickly, it really makes me wonder if you really understand it. I’m not trying to No True Scotsman my way around it; I really don’t understand.

I do a lot of con/fair/vendor stuff and support. I have heard (but never done because that’s illegal) that among friends it’s very common to not check that flag to save those friends some headache. It’s also a really good way to get scammed if you do it for strangers on the internet.

I suspect that platforms push it down to the users to reduce their compliance burden. Why make life better for your end users by spending some money when you can just make life more complicated for small businesses by having them own everything even the things they don’t know about?

Not quite. The meme is referencing a new law that targets platforms when the money is sent as a payment. So, for example, if you Venmo your roommate 2k over a year for utilities, your roommate is fine unless you mark it as for a vendor (there’s a little toggle whose exact text I forget). This meme is making that joke.

Advanced tech? What advanced tech? People watching you on cameras? The highest rate of wake word false positives? Something else I’m too dumb to understand?

While I personally think a removal of encryption tends be on the other side of this conflict, I have been called a nonce several times by otherwise leftist folks because of my support for strong encryption(ie the only people who want encryption have something to hide ergo you’re a nonce). This is all anecdote so YMMV.

Jokes aside this is fucking rad and a continuation of great things from them. I really dread the day iFixit enshittifies.

As a hiring manager, I don’t give a shit about certs. AWS certs, for example, serve primarily as marketing material and free money. Soft skill certs like agile methodology (of which I have several) are equally bullshit in that everything is a pattern not a prescription yet many people miss that and shoot their teams in the foot. There are some security certs I do value, such as CISSP, because they can be required for certain industries and actually do carry some gravitas. Even those, though, aren’t necessarily valuable for the things I actually need my security folks to do.

I’d say the market is maybe 30/70 split with folks like me and ATS or idiot hiring managers thinking your ability to memorize the specific GCP settings no one uses will actually make you understand why prod blew up. I refuse to get any; I actively support my team getting them as long as they know what they’re getting into.

I use uBlock Origin to remove tracking. I also manually remove tracking. Privacy Badger is a tool that works to explicitly do this kind of tidying.

Your analogy doesn’t work at all.

If one of the core harms is the removal of income and tracking, ad blockers fall into this category. Ad blockers very explicitly remove these things. The harm is not “Honey stole my income” it’s “Honey removed my tracking and Honey added their tracking.” Read the Legal Eagle case.

I am genuinely concerned about this because Legal Eagle’s suit is directly tied to manipulating URLs and cookies. The suit, even with its focus on last click attribution, doesn’t make an incredibly specific argument. If Legal Eagle wins, this sets a very dangerous precedent for ad blockers being illegal because ad blockers directly manipulate cookies and URLs. I haven’t read the Gamer’s Nexus one yet.

Please note that I’m not trying to defend Honey at all. They’re actively misleading folks.