Don't threaten me with a good time.

Thats level one feury. Level 2 is when they tell you a well known asshole billionaire is going to fight the shadow cabal for us.

Being insulated from reality and surrounded by sycophants causes literal brain damage.

Its fine, but in English, three and a half thousand (fraction rather than decimal) is probably more common.

You are expecting someone to commit suicide for their values. Thats what life in prison under unjust prosecution is. He would expect to die there, alone.

Yeah, thats the most moral stance he could have taken, but he also didn't ask us to put our trust in him. He's not a politician. Those people DO ask us to put our trust in their character and ethics and were demonstrably shown to be lacking when illegal spying was clearly present.

All he asked for was for people to look at the evidence he presented and demand rule of law. He could be a puppy killer, and it wouldn't matter. He didn't ask to be elected to anything or put in charge of anything, and he acted like a self-serving human being in the end.

If America lives up to the claim of being just, it didn't seem to look like it in this case. The instant and well funded propaganda campaign against him was not an indication it would be a case of blind justice.

What a loaded question. Hero is such a poorly defined yet super high bar. Firefighters who die rescuing children don't even typically want to be called a hero. This just sets up people to say no and muddy the water.

Did he stand up for democracy and transparency and rule of law? Yes. Did he suffer for his actions from powerful people more concerns for the political harm caused by the exposure of illegal actions? Yes.

Did he do everything right? No, he's human, and wasnt asking to be lionized or elected anything. He wanted people to look at the materials and demand change from governments. He didn't get what he wanted, and ended up stuck in Russia, where people can dismiss him as just a traitor, so no, he didn't do everything right. He could have also thrown himself on the mercy of the American justice system, no matter how doomed that would be. But he's human, so I don't expect suicide.

The whole "regulation is bad" scheme was bought and paid for with billions of dollars spent a small number of people who could make tens of billions by conducting their business without concern for the damage (economic externalities) they do. Its a transparent history and obvious on its face.

And yet so many average people go online and parrot it back, drinking the coolaid and passing it along.

What makes you think they want to kill it? I think they regret choosing GPL software to base it on, and dgaf about the small segment of people who use forks, except to worry that one of them might take off with an OEM and regular people.

This is exactly why the original question is so loaded to be disengenuois.

Answering yes sounds foolish, while a complex answer sounds like waffling or even excusing, and will be generally ignored. Only the person who answers clearly with a "no" sounds reasonable.

I don't think that has been true in a long time. Probably about the timeframe that fox news channel has been available.

Even on its face, it is identity verification, not age verification. And thats before we get conspiratorial.

Because having that much power and money literally causes brain damage.

Being insulated from consequences and reality for long enough, and you lose access to the feedback that keeps that squishy neural network from going heywire.

Parking brake is not the same. Try googling it. Or think of the physics -your car can go from 60 to zero a lot faster than it can go zero to 60. Or watch the top gear episode where they test it on a mustang with a thousand horsepower and stock brakes.

The big downsides are:

1. Yet another Internet tax on the poor
2. Everyone gets worse internet
3. Most people are woefully unprepared to shop for a VPN from a reputable provider, meaning most people are going to end up subjected to even more surveillance and potentially attacks on their devices.
4. Most people also are not prepared to manage when to and not-to use it, so will get slower internet all of the time.
5. This will create lists of VPN users at both the ISPs and the VPN companies that will be usable by later christo-fascist governments.
6. This will ultimately get laws passed against consumer-facing VPN services, making it harder for people to protect themselves from other attacks.
7. More honey-pot VPN services will start up to support that list-gathering for future christo-fascist governments looking to build dossiers on as many people as possible.

I could go on and on. And nothing about the above has anything to do with porn.

Clickwrap should have been made illegal when they started doing it a quarter century ago. If I put a tracker on your car, I'm a criminal, but if every automaker drops a clause into the "user terms" on their vehicle sales, then every car you buy gets tracked forever, perfectly legally.

According to the article, this is mainly for grouping tabs with a suggested name. Talk about backwards. Use AI to process the top websites on the Internet and create groups and/or logic to group them by keywords (cluster analysis), then save the small data structure in Firefox so it can group most websites instantly, using kilobytes of ram in the process; don't try to do this on everyone's device ffs.

Besides the heat and battery problem, this also means that the GUI is going to be non-deterministic, suggesting groups differently day-to-day based on the slight differences of input and the whims of the LLM. Burn it with fire.

Even if you stay on GitHub, definitely mirror to another host. Git is designed to be distributed, why not make use of that capability!

It’s about the information vacuum. Now every service will get your ID or photo, giving them both age and a whole sort of other metrics to build a profile on you. And yes, Lemmy.ca doesn’t know that about me.

That bubble is starting to make funny noises and develop patterns on its surface. Wonder what’s next?

Besides the anti-woke bullshit, it's just a bad idea to accept. It is absolutely not normal for a grant to have stipulations that if you violate some vaguely defined criteria somewhere in your organization, it can be clawed back at a later time. That's a huge liability for an organization to take on that they may suddenly owe a million dollars some time in the future.