The algorithms killed the platforms. They’ve become vapid, empty holes that only attract people addicted to them like junkies.

The internet can be fun, but you’re not going to find it on the platforms. You’re only going to find fun in places where people talk to each other. And even then, if you’re thin skinned you’re going to wind up in an outrage filled circlejerk. If you loosen up and go where the algorithms don’t exist you can have a good time.

Misuse lol. People need to get their panties out of their butthole. You build a photo generator and get mad when someone uses it to make a picture of Marx with tits. Who cares? Crybabies can cry about it.

They want to make everything impossible to fix. They want to turn our land into landfills and fleece us of our income.

Climate change or no, electric fan or no, anyone with self respect would rather buy a 1990 beater than a new car, they’re user and owner hostile.

The show ends early, but until the final season, very very closely. I won’t spoil it but towards the end production of the show ran into some problems due to some ill advised behaviors by one of the actors, and then they kind of just tell you what happened in the book and rush through the shows ending, they covered like half a book in the final episode, the usual shitshow when a show dies prematurely.

The books don’t end when the show does. The show is still worth watching, 100%, but I think if it had ended when syfy dropped it it would’ve ended on a high note.

The internet is fine.

Listen. The era of algorithms and automated aggregators and what not feeding you endless interesting content is over. Before that we read blogs, we shared them on Usenet and IRC, we had webrings. We engaged in communities and the content we were exposed to was human curated. That is coming back. If we can quit it with the hackernews bot spam on Lemmy, it can be one of those places. You need to find niche forums that interest you that are invite only and start talking to people. The future of the internet is human.

VIN locking and any attempt at anything like it should be illegal, full stop.

While I’d say altruism is not a virtue the way it is defined in our culture, I will say that who we are is about 50% nature and 50% nurture, and inside we are very different beings for one reason or other. A born sociopath is only human the same as you in visible form, the being is nothing like you. A person who was badly abused and tattoos his face and perpetuates abuse on those around him is completely different from you both. A monk in a monestsry and an Instagram influencer are completely different beings inside, besides some basic neurology that makes them both human. If you could see the being inside every human they’d look as different as Pokémon. That’s my philosophical insight.

I drop usernames without a second thought if it suits me. I use different ones I think up on the fly most of the time. The only one that matters to me is one attached to my development activities in the FOSS community, and I might share opinions using it but primarily I use it to engage in discussion related to development so that people who know me in those circles know who they’re talking to.

torrents-csv

Open a link in any browser i like. Say “no” to updates. Have a main menu that doesn’t look like a kiosk at the mall. Have my habits on my computer kept to myself. Install applications from outside an application store. Not need an antivirus software.

Hmm curious.

Absolutely not.

He was a very high profile criminal.

Hot Tub Time Machine 2 is way better and super underrated.

Burn After Reading.

Meh, this is overblown.

They seized the control servers of the malware operation, used that to send an update destroying the bots, after getting a warrant to do so. In the article it makes it seem like they searched everyone’s computer, even though the warrant explicitly forbade them from doing so, saw the bot software and then targeted them. This is not the case.

The warrant explicitly forbade the FBI from searching the computers they for the warrant for. The article implies that they could violate the warrant if they want to. And they could. But by that logic any warrant can be abused, let’s just get rid of warrants. And the issue at hand, that the court issued the warrant, is being glossed over on this point. The FBI had this capability, they’ll abuse it warrant or no if they’re trying to abuse it. The warrant makes no difference. So why even bring up the warrant?

Yeah I understand that, but I don’t think it’s a good rule even generally speaking. It doesn’t actually prevent abuse, all it does is disempower people from being autonomous via social stigmatization as a mechanism rather than penalty of law.

Personally, I think the number is arbitrary and there are 20 year olds incapable of making responsible decisions, and 15 year olds that are. But that’s the world we live in, it’s a compromise we make with our community to prevent abuse of little kids, and a way to set expectations of people, “by this age you need to be capable of looking out for yourself or you’re going to have a hard time”. I’m OK with this particular compromise, arbitrary though it may be. I don’t know that there is a smarter alternative, and half your age plus seven is most definitely further from the goal than a set age when someone is expected to be able to navigate the world on their own. In older times (and in some less developed cultures even today), people were expected to be capable at puberty, in others it was when their fathers said they could, and we don’t do that anymore because those systems almost always lead to fathers selling their children. So I’m happy with the current rule.

I said food was made from carbon dioxide and water, and repeatedly explained the process I was referring to. I never once said carbon dioxide was “in” food, although even if I did I don’t think it is this easy to misunderstand what I’m saying.

100% OK with it, yes. We either respect someone’s decisions or we don’t. If we decide “someone is free to do what they want when they’re 18” then that’s that. If that’s what they choose to do then it’s none of my business.

There are plenty of abusive, coercive and controlling relationships between people of the same age range. There are plenty of 40 year old women getting mistreated in new relationships. If a 19 year old is with a 70 year old, I doubt there’s some power dynamic there, most likely the woman is selling herself in a situation like that for a big payday, which is her choice. There are way less 70 year olds controlling their 18 year old girlfriends than there are 32 year olds doing it to their 30 year old girlfriends. It would seem age is not a good heuristic when trying to determine whether abuse is occurring, when it comes to adults at least.