It’s good. All media is presumed to be fake. Nobody can be hurt by naked bodies anymore, the market for real porn collapses and overall real exploitation is reduced. I think Ai is a solution to our fucked up relationship with naked bodies and sex.
Agreed they make irresponsible choices sometimes, and we can think that policy can protect them, but we have no control over most of those choices when it comes to seeking behavior. Driving starts at early teens a lot of places anyway, and cars can be stolen, and the cost barrier to entry is super high. There’re other separate regulations about weapons, and kids with weapons are already getting them from an adult or stealing them, barrier to entry is high for purchase. Sex you absolutely cannot control and thinking you can is absurd for germane topic of seeking behavior, barrier to entry is effectively zero. Drugs are illegal or stolen from the start so moot point.
The only way to really curb any of these seeking behaviors is to educate the child and give them some experience with it. Enforcing age barriers doesn’t really work much for these, why would digital age barriers do much for media or anything else? You make responsible people out of children by educating them and giving them responsibility experience to make better choices, and some will always have seeking behavior and age checks don’t really stop them… It just invades the privacy of the rest of us.
Protection from media at the government level should not happen, that’s the slippery slope. Very few policies aside from educate children about topics, has ever actually helped a child. This shit is about data and overlord control. Devices should not have age verification.
Very little good comes from arbitrary control, particularly based on age, and always has been that way even on other topics that are age restricted. Education is a far more effective means, and doesn’t trample everyone.
We should not care about verifying age.
But they’re coming for everything. There won’t be anywhere to go to get information. You’ll give up everything?
If you’re getting the ads you’re there to watch something you wanted to watch.
It’s difficult… We’re not very good at determining what is right and then enforcing it, so we have this weird hybrid system of semi-freedom with some exceptions, and sometimes the utility is responsible and sometimes the user and sometimes it’s free speech or protected art and sometimes it’s not protected speech and it’s not protected art.
Sometimes I think we should encode lessons we’ve learned as evil because they are clearly evil and bad for society, and to ban/prosecute them, but then I look at our world and you realize we can’t be trusted to encode the right things or properly follow through.
As much as anyone may dislike it, it’s a form of private journalism, private opinion, and private art, and almost all the content itself is free speech. You have to regulate the medium as harmful, very specifically described functionality. What is not protected is stuff like infinite scrolling, but something like comments and voting are likely also protected as speech.
I’m ok with both going. Ymmv
It’s all assholes… all the way up, and all the way down. If you’re lucky you find few good ones in the middle if you make it there for long enough.
Good, speed up the pace, weed them out, praise be Darwin
You just need literally anything else other than the native browser to do it no?
Soft enough to let you down gently as it takes your job
Private tenant doesn’t guarantee privacy, only the data cleansing policy does, since you’re certainly sending data outside the tenant to process by AI. Even if the model is local, each model instance must only have access to a single patient’s data to ensure privacy, else it’s possible an exploit could grab everything or to hallucinate someone else’s data.
Which type of voter is leaving? It determines who wins.
I mean, I definitely agree on this specific use-case that it’s problematic. I think some aspects can be resolved with smart contracts or multi-signature requirements, but it really fails here when it comes to compulsion.
If a court cannot compel someone to transfer, because the court doesn’t have the keys… Or you lose the keys and cannot… Obviously this falls apart.
There is a reason people deride nfts, mostly it’s due to ignorance and spectacle lemming behavior surrounding the ape pictures, but the legitimate criticism is really there aren’t many use-cases. But we don’t and shouldn’t wait to build things until a use-case exists. Nfts could be important eventually for preventing things like naked shorts maybe. There are likely very valuable use-cases.
Fortunately our unfortunately that’s all a blockchain is lol. It’s not really different than an exchange pointing to a blockchain and people agreeing 1 bitcoin on that chain is worth X. You always need consensus from multiple entities, but the difference is these ledgers are public, and secured by math. That’s it.
Probably is, but the concept is sound. The inspections and other things aren’t always necessary, but even if they are, an nft transfer can likely be setup to be digitally signed by the recognizing authority. This creates a record on the public ledger rather than a private one, which can be a nice thing. For better or worse nft confers ownership of recognized by such an authority, so there is no concept of not allowed to sell. This is a fundamental feature of blockchain… Enforced control and ownership
It’s just a technology even though people equate it with wildly overpriced art you can copy and paste, which is naive and reductive.
I mean, they could retain the simplicity but perhaps there is room for some basic nav improvement without bloat or enshittification.