sicktriple

I'm really hoping they're doing this to pave the way for an RCS implementation. If it can be done, GOS is in the best position to make it happen, and without RCS, chatting with normies is both extremely inconvenient (large group chats straight up do not work) and categorically insecure. If I could convince all my friends and family to use Signal I would, but they just think I'm on about some weird Edward Snowden shit, and they just write me off as crazy. "Why would I checks notes download software to solve a problem when I could use the one that came with my phone?"

The Century of American Humiliation continues

The government isn't typically facilitating the check. In order to verify your age, you will be required to hand over your ID to a third party, who's privacy and security practices are likely: "Trust me bro."

Seeing as how these companies get hacked all the time, (https://krebsonsecurity.com/2026/09/fbi-probes-service-selli...) , I don't think it's unreasonable to resist this.

Furthermore, I think many folks have reservations about requiring an ID checkpoint to utilize a computer. Obviously it's not that bad yet, but I don't think it's hyperbolic to state that the landscape is certainly trending in that direction, and it's absolutely not unreasonable to point out that governments and institutions to have a material interest in setting up access controls on who can and can't use the internet (read: participate in society).

Yes. Once the application of force happens outside the state's monopoly, they'll shut that shit down so fast.

Pretty sure this is just slop, but generously engaging in good faith:

Big "bedtime is slavery" vibes off this one. Just because you've had every option afforded to you by your mega IQ and elite status doesn't make you a martyr because you get anxious about going on LinkedIn. There are kids who live their whole lives in absolute misery until they get blown up by a US/Israeli bomb. Whether or not you get to work at a startup or not is not tyranny.

This whole culture is so cringe. There's great dignity in being comfortable with your work. Find something that you feel is a noble toil, and just do it to the vest of your ability. I know janitors and chefs who I respect infinitely more than some SF dork whining because they can't decide which startup to work for.

If you told me in 2001 Francis Fukuyama would be writing articles for the largest socialist magazine in the U.S. I would have said... well I probably would have just been confused since there were no large socialist magazines in the U.S. (and there still arguably aren't), but it's still kind of weird.

I don't see a problem with this. AI can be useful but the pressure to use it as a shortcut to mastery can be very strong. Kids need to develop the reflex to think critically before they reach for the LLM.

You're literally describing the steam machine/steam deck. Also, bazzite is an immuable distro based on silverblue that does pretty much exactly what you described.

I know there's some issues with big picture mode and Nvidia, but that's an Nvidia driver problem, not a limitation of the platform.

Honestly it's pretty cool besides the obviously Claude-written dialogue and tooltip text. That shit is so grating and makes my skin crawl.

GOS's intended audience are those who are in danger of being hacked or persecuted, not privacy conscious users trying to escape surveillance. Google, for all their faults, is pretty unlikely to hack your phone and reveal your secrets.

What in the deranged Hitlerian screed is this garbage

Because interpersonal communication is based on effort and collaboration. If you just copy and paste an AI output in response to me making a human effort to communicate, you're essentially saying that my time is not valuable to you and you cannot be bothered one single solitary fuck to literally even utilize your brain and come up with some sort of response. People use the internet to collaborate with other people, not just talk to a robot. If I wanted to talk to a robot, I could ask Claude myself.

If you can't be bothered to write it, then there is literally no reason for me to read it.

I do not agree. I think that Fox news is much farther right than MSNBC is left. Again, MSNBC is generally a cente left publication, in comparison to the entirety of the political spectrum. There might be outright Nazi Groypers farther to the left than Fox, bit they aren't far off nor do they disagree on much. Whereas a center left rag like MSNBC is outwardly hostile to actual socialist or communist ideologies, of which are essentially nonexistent inside the US, hence it being a right wing nation.

This is verifiably false. Without copyleft licensing like the GPL or permissive licensing like MIT and Apache we literally would not have the internet, or it would be somehow even more wildly dystopian and proprietary than it already is.

You could replace nearly every instance of "the Internet" in this article with "capitalism" and it would make perfect sense.

There is much farther left than left-libs. The U.S. doesn't get anywhere near as left as it goes. MSNBC is center-left, at most. This is a very right wing country.

MSNBC is far left? Next you'll tell me Joe Biden is a Maoist.

You're missing the point. The efficacy of these regulatory bodies are not a concern for those controlling them. Those individuals have the means to isolate themselves from anything that might negatively affect the rest of us hogs, and they get to collect the spoils. They're just ripping the copper wiring out of the walls.

What an absolute clown car country, embarrassing

What in particular do you find hacky about Asahi? I've been daily driving Asahi Fedora for about 8 months on a 13" M1 MBP, a significant portion of the project has been upstreamed to the kernel at this point, so the bar is set very high. The most significant compromises I've encountered have to do with Fedora's aarch64 repos, nothing to do with Asahi itself.

rude

He literally didn't, but ok

You don't actually need to click on an ad or purchase something from an ad site in order for Facebook to make money selling ad space.

The moment these ads are loaded on the page, real time auction occurs, where advertisers place bids algorithmically and automatically, based on your profile. Facebook makes it's money by selling this ad space. It doesn't particularly care whether you click on them or not. But if they don't load in the first place, there's nothing for Facebook to sell.

The real insideous part is that advertisers don't need to actually bid on the auction to participate, and anyone participating gets to havest your ad profile. This is one of the big ways data brokers are able to build profiles on you. They can then do whatever they want with this info, and you'd probably never know.

Sure, you can say whatever makes you feel better. You can say you're a pirate.

But writing off the mechanisms of large scale institutions as the result of moral actors is reductive and doesn't serve to address the systematic root cause of the issue, and ironically let's these people off the hook by narrowing the focus onto a group of particularly vile individuals. It's the "few bad apples" myth. I many ways, were all complicit. These are all human beings, after all. This is the true face of mankind.

Certainly I agree. Those conclusions, if we take them to their root, can only be that there is some type is systematic deficiency in our socioeconomic order that incentivizes this type of behavior.

Don't mistake my comment for arguing against criticism of institutions, but that arguing whether or not something is "good" or "bad" doesn't draw you to a conclusion that is any more eor less substantive than that analysis.

Yes, I would. An extremely dangerous and important one to get right in fact.

Let me first clarify what I am not saying. I am not saying that these institutions do not create evil, or commit evil acts and should not be resisted or destroyed. If we truly want these things to stop happening, material analysis is the only way to really address the root of the problem.

We can easily see that fascism was a result of the twisted incentive structure of colonial empire, the evolution of state corporatism as an economic mode, and rabid anti-communism rolled into one, etc etc. What I'm trying to say is that if your take away was just that Hitler was a bad guy and the Nazis were evil (which they very well may be), then you're doomed to repeat these events because this isn't a real analysis. It's not just that he was evil, it's that the socioeconomics lined up in such a way that allowed these things to happen. There will always be bad people seeking to take advantage of conditions, we will never be able to control that. What we can do is apply material analysis to events and try and determine the root cause of them, so we can prevent them from happening again.

What does this have to do with Meta? Well, my point it, Meta doesn't suck because Zuckerberg sucks. He very well may or may not, but that's not alalysis. Meta sucks because the incentive structure surrounding the attention economy is fetid and rotten, and that's a problem with all of us. Thats a problem within our society that allows these types of things to happen, and we ignore that at our own peril, just as we ignore the material reality that lead to the Holocaust by saying it happened because "Hitler and the Nazis were evil and that's that."

Applying value judgements to corporate bodies or institutions as if they have individual agency is a fallacy anyways. We should always look at these things materially. "Meta" can't be good or evil, because an idea can't have a morality. It's comprised of the individuals who make the decisions, sure, but those individuals are always going to be motivated by a plethora of reasons which are often contradictory, most notably their material interests.

When we critiqe these sorts of institutions it's important not to prescribe value judgements on them and examine the circumstances of their condition materially.

Fair play. This should 100% be viewed as a logical extension of that same effluvium. This is not a bug but a feature for them, many of these laws allow companies like Meta to offshore the responsibility of not harming children onto individuals while continuing to melt the brains of anyone unfortunate enough to still have a Facebook or Instagram account.

edit: sp

Why would he care about that? They're not the ones paying him.

Do we think that as a society there exists some meaningful lever by which we can apply force against this type of carelessness and exploitation?

I think we need to take a good hard look at what we want out of this world and ask ourselves. Do we really need to automate this? Like really. What benefit does the world receive having an AI chatbot tell grandma the wrong doage for her meds? This is the naked extraction of value from a service that's already been offshored. Companies like these are gleeful to make their service as shitty as they can because they know their users are doing so against their will. Infact, that's become the goal.