NoraCodes

So is research that shows that mental illness has little link to violence. And, hell, so is homophobia! Let's say we make a law that says the state can black bag you and force you to take Abilify based on some arbitrary application of a psychology questionnaire by a state-employed psychologist; what's to say that a future administration doesn't reclassify homosexuality as a mental illness and do the exact same shit?

When people say that conservatism is fundamentally at odds with concepts like the human right to bodily autonomy, this kind of nonsense is what they mean.

There is no authoritative or even moderately reliable way to diagnose "dangerous" mental illness. It is a fairly well established fact that mental illness is more associated with _victimization_ than perpetration of violence. This kind of scaremongering is entirely based in ableism, not actual "common sense."

In your experience, why do mentally ill people not seek treatment?

There is definitely an inherent tension between forcing legitimate users to load JS and store CloudFlare's cookies, and keeping bots off of services. As an individual, having to load random nonsense from CloudFlare does not improve my experience!

I definitely see your point, but when there are, at minimum, dozens of people who are willing to undergo that 20 hour slog, I'm glad there's a tool that makes it take mere minutes to find OSINT leaks myself.

I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong in general. It's possible this is bad for the world. But I maintain that for myself and the people I care about, it's more useful than it is damaging.

Interesting - I don't see this as legally different to a bank charging overdraft fees, or a credit provider charging late fees, which I presume are possible in Europe?

I disagree entirely. As someone with a moderately public persona who is also in the LGBTQ+ community, having tools like this is extremely helpful, both to help me keep a grasp on information about myself and for helping less technically inclined people in my community protect themselves. It's all information that a motivated attacker could find easily with or without the tool, and there are a sufficient number of motivated attackers that any moderately public queer person will, at some point, be doxed and subjected to some level of internet harassment.

Indeed, I'm just clowning on them a bit to make a larger point. I do think it's important to make a distinction between "a single company can punish you for things they don't like, if you are their customer" and "broad social consensus that a single number represents your worthiness to interact with large swathes of services" - but we have both, already, in the US.

I'm fairly certain that the United States has its own version of the credit score system, called a "credit score".

> How is it even legal for paypal to do that?

It is part of the user agreement you're required to sign in exchange for being allowed to use their service. It might not be lawful, but you'd have to sue them to find out.

> Are they going to send debt collectors after them if their paypal balance is negative?

Probably not, but they'd be within their rights to do so.

> Why would anybody want to do business with Paypal now?

Many people think that their activities will never, under any circumstances, be considered obscene or otherwise objectionable by PayPal. Other people, such as myself, will continue to use it, but will take precautionary measures in order to reduce my exposure to this change.

I mean, invoking rustc on a single rust file is no harder than invoking gcc on a single file. cargo adds other features, as do make, cmake, etc for c.

I have the DevTerm, it's pretty neat.

It's not a zero sum game. We have the technology to ensure nobody starves, and not doing so seems transparently evil.

My point is not that society is bad because people hunger, but rather that we should structure our society such that they don't. Society itself is emergent and has no moral character. It's our leaders and to some extent ourselves that are at fault, at least in democracies.

I'm a woman, and a socialist, so no, I don't think anyone should be forced into sex work. I don't think anyone should be forced into any kind of work.

What on earth does that mean? That it's biologically impossible to give other people food?

Okay, but banning or further criminalizing sex work is not going to reduce human trafficking, but increase it, for the same reason that banning drugs doesn't reduce illegal drug sales. The demand is pretty inelastic. HRW has a decent primer on the topic here: https://www.hrw.org/news/2019/08/07/why-sex-work-should-be-d...

You're absolutely right. Some people think sex should be limited to married couples, and some of those people also think they're within their rights to force other people to adhere to their moral code. They are wrong. What other consenting adults do with each other is not the province of anyone's morality but their own.

Let us not recapitulate the doctrinal debates of the 1980s.

> We also know that the vast majority of people who work in the "industry" are either coerced by others or forced into it by life circumstances.

Most people are forced into work by life circumstances. That's how society operates: work or starve.

Sex trafficking is a genuine issue, but it's not at all the majority of the industry. I don't see what makes consensual sex work uniquely coercive or evil when compared to other physically or emotionally intensive labor.

I agree that ESR and Martin are quite overrated, but why Kay? And why call out that you expect downvotes?

Because it's ridiculous to do so when you have a bomber fleet larger than the entire rest of the world's combined, and because it's far more expensive to build and maintain than just sending a carrier group to wherever you need to strike.

I'd argue the year was 2014, but I largely agree; there have been many improvements since then, but few of them landed for the average desktop user - partly because of the intense push to get people off of desktops.

Much of this author's fiction derives its value from technical feasibility.

The article suggests that it is a minor cause of point mutations.

> I've always wondered if the body (or life in general) relies upon any unknown/undiscovered physical phenomena.

I mean, in the sense that we don't fully understand how many parts of cells work, definitely, but probably not in the sense of undiscovered physical underpinnings.

> I wonder if any other aspect of life depends on quantum tunneling to function?

Possibly! It may help birds navigate by magnetoperception: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01725-1

Oh, I see what you mean. I'm referring to the argument from Dell and Microsoft that a "secure" device requires that there are no, or very few, user serviceable components. "Locked down" is an overloaded term here.

Right, absolutely. That's a choice that people get to make - they can either buy a Framework laptop that does have the ability to change out the OS, or if their threat model requires it, one that doesn't. Either way, they get upgradable components and future-proofing. I don't see how that's a negative for freedom.

That's wonderful to hear! I'm very excited about where Framework is going these days.

I absolutely disagree. If anything, this is a total validation of the idea that security does not require a locked-down device.