Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | MSFT_Edging's commentslogin

I think the idea is that the biome is built up over time and you can't always just eat your way to certain bacteria growing in your gut.

I think the fecal transplants help to essentially seed your gut with healthy bacteria, which makes adapting to the proper diet easier when your body isn't constantly fighting you.


> Physical businesses have liability if they provide age restricted items to children.

These are often clear cut. They're physical controlled items. Tobacco, alcohol, guns, physical porn, and sometimes things like spray paint.

The internet is not. There are people who believe discussions about human sexuality (ie "how do I know if I'm gay?") should be age restricted. There are people who believe any discussion about the human form should be age restricted. What about discussions of other forms of government? Plenty would prefer their children not be able to learn about communism from anywhere other than the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation.

The landscape of age restricting information is infinitely more complex than age restricting physical items. This complexity enables certain actors to censor wide swaths of information due to a provider's fear of liability.

This is closer to a law that says "if a store sells an item that is used to damage property whatsoever, they are liable", so now the store owner must fear the full can of soda could be used to break a window.


That's not a problem of age verification. That's a problem of what qualifies for liability and what is protected speech, and the same questions do exist in physical space (e.g. Barnes and Noble carrying books with adult themes/language).

So again, assuming we have decided to restrict something (and there are clear lines online too like commercial porn sites, or sites that sell alcohol (which already comes with an ID check!)), why isn't liability for online providers the obvious conclusion?


> That's a problem of what qualifies for liability and what is protected speech

The crux is we cannot decide what is protected speech, and even things that are protected speech are still considered adult content.

> why isn't liability for online providers the obvious conclusion?

We tried. The providers with power and money(Meta) are funding these bills. They want to avoid all liability while continuing to design platforms that degrade society.

This may be a little tin-foil hat of me, but I don't think these bills are about porn at all. They're about how the last few years people were able to see all the gory details of the conflict in Gaza.

The US stopped letting a majority of journalists embed with the military. In the last few decades it's been easier for journalists to embed with the Taliban than the US Military.

The US Gov learned from Vietnam that showing people what they're doing cuts the domestic support. I've seen people suggesting it's bad for Bellingcat to report on the US strike of the girls school because it would hurt morale at home.

The end goal is labeling content covering wars/conflicts as "adult content". Removing any teenagers from the material reality of international affairs, while also creating a barrier for adults to see this content. Those who pass the barrier will then be more accurately tracked via these measures.


However there are also parts of the internet that are clear cut, like porn.

What about nude paintings/photography that aren't made with erotic intent?

Anatomical reference material for artists with real nude models?

What about Sexual education materials? Medical textbooks?

Women baring their breasts in NYC where it's legal?

Where is the clear cut line of Pornography? At what point do we say any depiction of a human body is pornographic?


Some things being unclear doesn't mean all things are unclear.

>Plenty would prefer their children not be able to learn about communism

Plenty of people would prefer that children not learn about scientology from pro-scientology cultists too. It's not that they can't know about scientology (they probably should, in fact, because knowledge can have an immunizing effect against cults)...

And it's not that they can't know about communism (they probably should, in fact, because knowledge can have an immunizing effect against cults)...


Would you also be against learning about Capitalism from the Heritage foundation?

This is a comment section about large corporations lobbying against our ability to freely use computers and you break out the 80's cold war propaganda edition of understanding a complicated economic system that intertwines with methodology for historical analysis with various levels of implementations from a governmental level.

You're either a mark or trying to find a mark.


Personally it's the fact they introduced such an extreme and opinionated UI design change, but then couldn't be bothered to roll it out consistently. The old window radii were fine. Sequoia looked good. The OS felt good as a whole. Then we get an update where you have a very opinionated theme forced on you in a half-assed fashion. If you could just disable it, return to classic radii, it'd be a nothing burger and Apple would roll it back if enough people disabled it.

But that's not how apple works.


This is the exact attitude that lead to a chat bot being used to identify a school for girls as a valid target.

The chatbot cannot be held responsible.

Whoever is using chatbots for selecting targets is incompetent and should likely face war crime charges.


"that lead to a chat bot being used to identify a school for girls as a valid target"

Has it been stated authoritatively somewhere that this was an AI-driven mistake?

There are myrid ways that mistake could have been made that don't require AI. These kinds of mistakes were certainly made by all kinds of combatants in the pre-AI era.


Do you think anyone is ever going to say this under any circumstances? That Anthropic were right and they were proved right the very next day?

Yeah yeah, they probably had a human in the loop, that’s not really the point though.


Targeting and accuracy mistakes happen plenty in wars that aren't assisted by AI. I don't think it's fair to assume that AI had a hand in the bombing of the school without evidence.

What attitude exactly are you talking about? The one that says that if you’re going to morally sell out it would be better if you at least tried not to kill children?

I use a FOSS voice recorder app from F-Droid. It's just called "Voice Recorder" with an orange icon. It does exactly what it says, records audio from your microphone, lets you play them back. They're just files on the device.

Anytime I need a "simple" utility, I check f-droid first to get the one-trick-pony app over spyware from the play store.

Other utilities I use are: WorkTimer: pomodoro app DiskUsage: self explanatory Http Request Shortcuts: setup home screen app shortcuts that run http requests


Yeah I swapped to using the f-droid version after that debacle, though the one i use has a green icon. XD

FYI, "Department of War" still isn't the official name, but an unofficial secondary title.

You can be correct and not play into their game by ignoring the name change completely.


I do so from the Gulf of Mexico.


The US is one.

If you live by a small airport frequented by personal aircraft, you're getting bombarded by lead.

Now just imagine living next to a teaching airport that does aerial laps around the neighborhood.


Why the hate on the gens?

Most of this stuff was not widely known. There was no internet, so you only got info from 3 tv channels and a newspaper, magazines and conversation.

Blame it on the corps.


Lead poisoning was discovered in a year that is denoted with "B.C.E".

It wasn't news when the additive was invented for gasoline in the 20s, and it wasn't news all through the 70s.

Of course blame it on the corporations. On GM specifically, who also lobbied for jay-walking to become illegal so their cars would stop getting bad press for killing people.


Intelligent people read books.


That's not actually true. Companies can opt to report your employment to credit agencies, providing another datapoint in background checks.


I think there's room to raise the bar of required tech competency without registration.

Manually installing an app might be close to the limit of what grandma can be coached through by an impatient scammer.

Multiple steps over adb, challenges that can't be copy and pasted in a script, etc. It can be done but it won't provide as much control over end user devices.


There's a law going through in some state that want's to do this, but also put the onus on the OS developers to detect age aligned behavior. How do you do this with Linux? It would kill the open computer and kill ownership over computing.


Why would it be a problem to do this sort of thing with linux? Linux allows for oauth, proxied networking, what have you -- unless they're using some super-secret-unpublished-protocol, linux will be fine

I'm against these age-verification laws, but to say it's impossible to comply with open-source software isn't really true.


The point is that you won't be able to just install a Linux distro of your choice in this world - your computer will only run approved OSs that have gone through some kind of certification process to make sure they enforce age-verification content. If, say, the Debian foundation doesn't want to add these mandatory controls because they feel it goes against the spirit of Debian (not to mention the huge issues with the GPL), then your new computer just won't be able to run Debian anymore. And something like Kali would be right out, of course, since anonymity is not compatible with age verification.


Or, Conversely, these systems won't be able to verify age and will just be shut out of adult content. Which is fine, just keep a windows machine around for porn and do your actual work on a real computer


> Which is fine

But it isn't fine. How long before that's no longer an option?

A few years ago it was "Apple won't let me side load apps, which is fine, I'll run android" now that's coming back and getting locked down even more.

How long before normal computers will all have signed bootloaders with only the OEM's OS of choice allowed to boot, 4 chains deep of verifying signatures on hardware security chips?


I can guarantee you that if this becomes ubiquitous and normalized for porn and social media, any code distribution site will be next.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: