here is the non-yahoo link: https://futurism.com/future-society/air-force-engineer-flock-surveillance-support-legal-gofundme

less tolerance for other valid opinions is hostile though. You can’t call differing opinions bullshit

This headline isn’t a bad headline. The article seems to be pretty well balanced, and leaves plenty siding with Wikipedia. It even mentions another news article that DOES have a bad headline:

Sanger has spent more than a decade criticizing Wikipedia for what he claims is an ideological, left-wing bias on a variety of topics, and on X has framed this recent ban as further proof of everything that’s wrong with Wikipedia. The New York Post took that bait and last night published an article with the headline “Left-leaning Wikipedia blocked founder from editing site—after he campaigned to make it more balanced.”

If you base something on facts, it will be left leaning. Right leaning has a higher value in loyalty, authority, respect, and spirituality. They will deny facts if they have to in order to prioritize their other values. Right leaning people tend to be more likely to be on time, have cleaner desks, and speak more formally to someone they deem a “superior”. Left leaning often could give a rats ass about authority, and respect is only given once it’s earned.

All that to say, facts and reality are more left leaning by nature. Given many religious folks will deny nature’s history for their spiritual beliefs.

I don’t really agree with the original comment, but your response is worse than what you’re responding to. What does what you saw in the modlog have to do with this comment? He really wasn’t that mean, and raises a valid point at least. You could’ve just said “We should’ve checked but it’s still a fun topic” or something that acknowledges the mistake but moves on anyway.

Also, if it costs money for people reading it, why would you share it? I assume you shared it because the cost is worth the price of sharing something you enjoy, but if that’s true why bring up cost at all?

Btw, it’s a bit cliche to respond to criticism with the sentiment of “I’d like to see you do better” rather than accept it for what it is (assuming there is validity to it).

I am an American who cares about privacy largely because of Snowden. His book was very eye opening, and a great read. So that’s at least 1 person

What do you mean? All that information is available in the next data breach

None of that is because of middle managers. No matter what, someone will need to job of coordinating with various departments, prioritizing tasks, selling ideas, motivating, and overall being good at coordinating. Idk if I’ve personally met a manager good at those things, but I know I would be worse at it.

I wish there was more, honestly. Not exclusive to FDroid, but Mindustry is probably the best open source game I’ve played. I enjoyed Breakout71, but once you are just trying to unlock jew apps it gets repetitive and too luck based with getting the upgrades you need

Most people who respect you won’t say anything until you do. I wouldn’t comment on someone’s weight in either direction unless they mentions it and confirmed it was intentional. There are plenty of cases where the weight loss is because of a disorder or disease, and it could be a sensitive subject. Definitely not something to congratulate them over.

It reads to me more like they are avoiding stating things that haven’t been proven in court. There are some details unknown, but that also seems more out of privacy since it was a child

I love Alex, literally just watched his fan video, but you can’t act like that one video is all we need on the subject. “There’s already a video on that” doesn’t really help anyone trying to bring awareness to a massive issue

How much of that applies here since they are overseas?

I mean it’s the only correct position but whatever

Why is it the only correct position?

I have absolutely no idea what “platform” you’re talking about though

I assume they meant android. If it was a Pixel phone running Android, they would be technically correct. But let’s be real, there’s a solid chance they use an iPhone anyway

You only get ID’d for alcohol if you look like a kid

Depends on the place

And when you do get carded, they look at your license, check the date, and hand it right back.

This is true for most places. There’s nothing stopping a creep from memorizing more than they should, but that’s of course an edge case.

While uncommon, there are places such as casinos that take everyones ID and use an ID scanner to add them to a local, or not local, database. Places that do that really are no different from websites that want to ID. Except with a website you’d provide it once, and at those facilities you have to have it scanned each time you go in.

But a blanket request on everyone to ID themselves by default is just not the way.

I couldn’t agree more. It’s a terrible idea and is going to spell disaster for many people. I am not arguing we should have websites collect IDs, my argument is about whether age verification on websites should exist in any form, even if it’s securely setup. Many people here think age verification is strictly a problem of parenting, and I think that’s an absurd argument.

Parents should ultimately be responsible for the activity of their child. If you can’t trust your child to use the internet/social media responsibly, they simply should not be given access to smart devices.

When people say this, I always think about how we ID for alcohol. If it’s the parents responsibility, they should never let their kid be able to go to the store to buy alcohol in the first place. The store shouldn’t have to ID people. Except most people don’t make this argument. I suppose if you agree with that statement, then you’d be consistent.

If a kid gets onto social media and does stupid things there

The stupid thing is using it. It’s bad for kids development. It’s not dissimilar to drinking. You could blame the parents if the kids got into the alcohol in their own home, but the same would also go for kids using their parents social media accounts.

Empower parents with better supervisory tools to be more involved, no need to violate the rights of everyone else.

I know I have been playing devil’s advocate for online ID, but I think it will be implemented in a way that is a privacy nightmare and am not in favor of the way it’s being done. However, is anonymity a right? Before 1980, nobody really got anonymity unless you authored something under a pseudonym, which we can still do. When people were outspoken about civil rights violation, they were often just out there in the public as themselves. Sure they could wear masks, but you couldn’t hide like you can on the internet.

The internet has allowed both for more anonymity than ever and also more tracking of people than ever. I do think it’s coincidental that this is coming at the same time as the birth/growth of AI, but it does kind of serve a convenient second purpose of validating humans (or at least you know that a person is using an AI to post on their account). It’s unfortunate that it’s a benefit, but we live in an age where people using social media/the internet now have to constantly question their reality and if people are even real. I don’t see a good solution to that without violating our previous expectations of privacy.

If age/human verification going to be done, I think it should be done correctly. Age verification could be done through Zero Knowledge Proofs where it only verifies your age and nothing else. I think one day our ID’s will have rotating security keys built into them that will be used both for in person and online verification. You’d be able to decide what information is provided to the website, so that if they only wanted to know “Are you 21+” it would only provide a YES or NO, and that’s it. I’m sure there will be some online method for doing the same thing before then, but it’d need to be tied to some form of biometric verification like a fingerprint or else it could be used maliciously. The most likely scenario is we start off by using phones to tie the ID to the person, and have the phones require some form of biometric lock.

All that to say, we are realistically headed towards a future where the the anonymity we were used to will be no more. At least for any website that doesn’t want AI spam. While just uploading pictures of our ID’s to websites is a terrible idea, it’s what the idiots in charge will likely have us do as this new process starts. If they’d let the smart people take their time to do it right, the whole thing wouldn’t be nearly as bad.

They want them to pass an ordinance blocking their use. They didn’t approve it, but they have the authority to stop it

I wish a mod would delete this, just for the irony. I get why they wouldn’t, given you’re allowed to have frozen peaches or whatever

I understand the subtext of this and why, and it isn’t meant to be taken literally, but there’s no way that’s true. 2 lbs of copper?? Is that including solar panels?