• 0 Posts
  • 172 Comments
Joined 3 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 13th, 2023

help-circle

  • It’s not just porn though.

    A lot of countries want to restrict children’s access to social media - not just Facebook, etc., but also in games like Minecraft, Roblox and so on, as these also serve as social platforms.

    Which is actually fine and I agree with the restriction - kids shouldn’t be on Facebook, Snapchat, or even Roblox without supervision. Emphasis on supervision. Why? Because paedos are proven to be using these platforms as hunting grounds for grooming. Look at Roblox - even if you manage to set up parental controls (which is almost like if it’s intentionally made hard to do so), paedos can get around it by using items like signs, that allow free text entry, to communicate with kids. Rule #1: kids (and paedos) will always try to find a way around restrictions, so you want those to be as transparent (read: invisible) as possible.

    The problem is, these platforms are intentionally making it impossible for parents to supervise their children’s activities. Most parental controls are done in a “we had to do it so we did the bare minimum work and implemented every possible malicious tactic to deter people from using it” manner instead of actual parental protection being in mind.

    Then these very same companies go to governments and plead that the current methods aren’t working, parents aren’t using the tools, and you can’t push this level of moderation onto them - Meta execs literally admit in internal memos that at this point, they just have to accept that children will be hurt, because doing anything would affect bottom lines. Their solution?

    Make everyone identify themselves. But that’s not actually for protecting children - it’s to continue mining even more data, because simply said, data miners have already gotten everything from everyone they could, and the only way this can be tied together even more is by adding your real identity to all that data. Oh and all your adult related browsing too, of course.

    And the sentiment won’t change until one of these “super duper secure, totally unhackable, totally not collecting your PII with all the rest of your data” companies gets hacked, exposed for data mining to extremes, all through dumping a bunch of politicians’ and powerful people’s porn habits. You think Noem’s husband being revealed as a crossdresser was damaging? Imagine top politicians - especially conservatives - being outed as trans- or bestiality porn watching “degenerates” (putting it in quotes because in my opinion only the latter is problematic, but to conservacucks…), or that they’re a prolific CSAM fanfic writer, and so on.

    In my opinion, everyone should have the privacy to browse the kind of (legal) porn they want, without it being shouted out to the world. Or abused by corporations. Privacy is a key element of our lives, and it should be up to each person to decide how much they reveal to anyone. This entire ID enforcement can only end badly. Kids will find a way around it - they already do in the UK, I mean a simple VPN gets around it, and luckily not all governments want to implement this crap - and all it does is expose those who abide by the law, to even more data breaches and such.


  • You’re misunderstanding the point of AGPL.

    Regular GPL software CAN be run over a network, but because the binary of the software isn’t distributed - only an interface is provided to the software itself - the host isn’t obligated to provide the source code. A lot of software hosts used this loophole to get around sharing their modifications to GPL licenced software, killing the main point.

    That’s why AGPL was developed - to protect hosted software. AGPL requires the host to provide source to anyone who has access to the service, not just the binary.

    GPL - if I have the binary, I must be granted access to the source

    AGPL - if I can access the software, I must be granted access to the source





  • Religion and science is in conflict because they’re antithetical to each other.

    Science demands that all you “believe in”, all your statements, derivations, conclusions, explanations, be based on fact - and if the supporting information changes, so do your statements/derivations/conclusions/explanations. Essentially, you write the book based on observations, and if the observed things change, so does the book.

    Religion is the other way around. All your observations, all your conclusions, etc., must bow to the book first. Anything that doesn’t fit the book is the work of the devil, thus bad.

    There’s no place for inconsistencies, for reiteration of the book (let alone rewriting - unless it’s officially approved ofc), it is the ultimate source of truth, unchanging and ever-existing.

    Of course you then get denominations that consider the Bible not the word of God but the human-transcribed (thus faulty) version of the word, therefore are much more flexible on how things are interpreted, but that still doesn’t allow science to co-exist with religion when the latter can be utilised to invalidate a fact-based system.





  • To be fair, there IS information that can make you immediately re-evaluate a person.

    To me, it was Musk’s “pedo guy” rant back in, what was it, '16, '17? Up until then, I thought he was an okay guy, doing tech things to improve humanity in general, and all the negative stuff being just… him being on the spectrum. It took me the moment he started throwing a very heavy accusation around quite baselessly to realise how shitty he is. A singular moment, a singular event, a singular piece of information made me re-evaluate everything I knew about him and see him for the shitstain he is.


  • A moderator cannot BAN your account. They can ban you from posting on their subreddit, and can, often baselessly, get you reported to admins (who 100% of the time side with the moderators), usually flagging any kind of modmail conduct as “threatening or harassment”.

    I’ve literally got a warning because I dared to ask a mod why they banned me - their response being a 30 day mute and a report to the admins about “Hey! I was wondering why you banned me, as I don’t think my comment broke any of the rules of the sub or Reddit” being threatening, and harassment…




  • So, again, what should happen with ewaste? should we just chuck it in landfill?

    it might have less gold, but recycling is recycling, you got to use as much of the raw material that went in as you can, precisely to reduce the waste itself.

    as for CPUs from 10-15 years ago… see if it was some proprietary system from the 70s-90s that’s impossible to emulate and only a handful units remain, I’d understand your outrage. But we’re talking about CPUs from the height of the computer boom, the true internet era, when even the least common model is available in the number of millions TODAY… That’s no longer a retro system you’re restoring, you’re literally upset about low performance, high power use hardware that has better alternative today, being recycled. Which has to be the stupidest thing I’ve read today…

    Like, quite literally, architectures and hardware design changed so little since 2010-2015. Aside from RISC-V making a comeback, it’s pretty much been linear predicted improvements on all fronts. Gone are the days of experimenting with architectural changes, experimental platforms that are super unique, and so on. Literally any game or software you can think of when it comes to a 10-15 year old device can run on today’s devices because we kinda plateaued around 2016-2018 at most, and compatibility hasn’t really shifted in any major way. Apple went for ARM instead of x86, but Rosetta is still there, so even ancient Mac apps work. Literally anything you could do on hardware from 10-15 years ago, you can do on modern hardware the exact same way, but more performant and using less resources.

    So what kind of “retro preservation” are you doing exactly?