Darth_Hobo

Yes. If I put myself in the position where I am heavily dependent on what they do then I have only myself to blame. And if it is a minor dependency then I probably won't even care. And if you are talking about them doing violence then bullets are cheap.

I think people should be responsible for their actions. If they only use google without even trying anything else then they are themselves to blame for whatever bias/lies google have fed them. And asking me to pay yet another tax for regulations so that dumb people are protected from the consequences of their actions is... it's like they are trying to build a kindergarten for adults. And I am not a fan of socialism.

Sorry, but I don't get why you must be entitled to having me serve you if I happen to have a server that serves other people. Just because I allow some people to visit my server does not imply that I am obligated to let you in. Because this a private property and owner have a right to decide who gets in on his private property. Unless you advocate for abolishing private property that is.

Good news. I hope it will be very expensive, so that only smart and hard working people can afford it for their children. Eventually we will need to leave lazy and stupid people behind, and creating a class of genetically superior humans is a good way to do it, because it will create a group identity and they won't consider themselves as normal humans. And when it is US vs THEM the hard choices are much easier to make.

Humans are already a certain type of genetics. Your cat is not equal to you. Not in rights, and not even in dignity. This implies that your ability for intelligence and learning is what defines your rights. And if some population will have an average IQ of geniuses then they will eventually have different rights than you do. Maybe not openly on paper, but definitely in practice.

Not on the same scale as USSR. The less you do it the farther you are away from making everyone poor. Europe still has a lot of capitalistic elements to counter the equality plague.

Making things available universally have already been tried in USSR. What it leads to is everyone being equally poor. And it also disincentive hard work, because most of the fruits of your labor will go to equality, instead of going to you. And because everyone gets things equally you might as well as work as little as possible - you will get what you want in any case.

I would be fine with UBI or any other form of welfare if I could personally opt out of it and not receive that welfare AND not pay any taxes for it.

Their model is overfitted. If you type "What the fuck did you" it will output Navy Seal copypasta with almost no changes. No wonder why it sometimes generates human-like texts, because in some cases it literally spews out its training examples with minimal or no changes.

Andrew Ng did a good analogy: it is like worrying about overpopulation on Mars. It will happen sometimes in the future, but worrying about it now is very premature.

It seems this networks is completely clueless about culture. I have typed "Flat is justice." and it completed it with texts about justice in judicial system instead of lolis and anime.

If you can view your old conversation from a fresh installation on a new devices then this automatically implies that some 3rd party has access to your keys. I.e. your conversion cannot be considered truly private.

At first I was excited about DOH, until I realized that you are simply switching data collection from ISP to whomever you choose as your trusted resolve in DOH (most likely Google or Cloudflare). So ideally we need another machine that does DOH requests and then sends you the results, but at this point you might as well setup a full VPN.

DOH might be a good alternative in places like China, because Cloudflare knowing about your browsing history is a lot less dangerous than Chinese goverment knowing about it. Unless DOH providers will sell that data to China. Which they probably will.

In practice you can host your browser redistributable on non-US server that has no obligation to US laws. And if US user chooses to download from that location there is nothing they can do about it.

That is why you use monero if you don't want government to spy on your every purchase.

It already exist and called freenet. If you read the arrest cases for freenet - they are almost non-existent.

It reminds of how EU can order facebook to delete its posts for the entire world, because EU wants to control what other people outside of EU are allowed to see.

https://www.euractiv.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2019/10/...

Why would we care about the benefit of the average person? How is that even an argument? Like imagine forbidding to publish some books or music, because we somehow decided that they might not benefit the average person.

If you are that worried about children you should think about inventing new ways to monitor children, so that it becomes impossible to do something to a child without a lot of people knowing about it. Instead of trying to find excuses to spy on everyone on the internet.

You do realize that FBI and similar state agencies shared CP online to catch people? So, did FBI victimize children and should face appropriate punishment (the same as other people who are sharing it)?

And about your last point: FBI and other people who investigate it absolutely do watch CP. Again - who is the victim in this specific case? Does children somehow not victimized when "good" people watch CP?

Nothing. If your kid actively seeks out porn then chances are that he is already mature enough for it. Thus the problem does not exist.

Edit: and the things you should watch out for is not porn, but have you kid joined some weird religious cult or a gang - that can cause a LOT more trouble than having an awkward conversation about sex.

That could easily be leaked by a single person, like Edward Snowden. People are not the perfect way to store secrets.

That is very unreliable, because humans can easily invent memories of events that did not occur. And it may even fool any lie detecting technology, if they truly believe it themselves.

For example, I was 100% sure that some event in 10 years past did happen, because I was there and saw it. Then a friend of mine said that it did not happen. I did not believe and checked the recording - and yes, it did not happen. What I thought I remembered actually happened at another time with a completely different person.

I think the whole concept that law should be enforced at all times is flawed. People should have more ways to resolve conflicts between themselves on their own, without cops getting involved - even if the law was broken.

At this point I would actually prefer a criminal street gang to physically protect me. Because they don't care about my private life as long as I pay up. Government does care about my private life, even if I pay up.

A counter argument for blocking e2ee because of sharing CP/Terrorism can be split in two parts:

1) If you have proof that they are sharing it then you simply do a criminal trial base based on that proof. No need to block e2ee because you already have proof.

2) If you do not have proof then you are assuming guilt without proof, and that is the opposite of how our justice system should operate. Innocent until proven guilty. No need to block e2ee, because you have not shown that any concrete person is breaking the law. And if you did show it, then look at point 1)

And thus we have exhausted both possible options, and in both cases there is no need to block e2ee.

As a free expression absolutists I see no problem with private companies refusing service, as long as they are not breaking their contract. And ideally it should be perfectly fine to have whites-only restaurants, or do a discriminatory hiring practice and not hire any women. Because I see no logical reason why freedom of association should have any limits, as long as you are not bound by some obligations that you have agreed to.

As for people crying about how internet is getting censored - don't be an impotent and start programming decentralized alternatives. Like Fediverse and Crypto devs do. If you really care about freedom that is. At this point it should be pretty clear that the major enabler of internet censorship is the whole paradigm of centralized services, because it concentrates too much power in one hands. In order to combat it we should create high-quality decentralized alternatives, where everyone owns a small chunk of the system and can only ban somebody from that specific chunk.