Ukrainian anti-aircraft gunners shot down a Russian Orlan drone carrying two first-person-view (FPV) drones under its wings for the first time, the 118th Separate Mechanized Brigade reported on Aug. 22.
This marks the first time the Ukrainian military has destroyed a so-called "mother drone" carrying other UAVs, the brigade claimed.
"Anti-aircraft gunners from the 118th Separate Mechanized Brigade destroyed an enemy Orlan drone carrying two FPV drones under its wings," the unit said in a Facebook post.
"Prior to this, the pilots of the pursuit platoon had already shot down dozens of enemy reconnaissance drones — Orlan, Zala, and Supercam — but this was the first time they had managed to destroy a mother drone."
The Orlan is a Russian-developed reconnaissance drone widely used by Russia in Ukraine. Feared by Ukrainian soldiers, it often serves to target Russian artillery attacks. It can travel 600 kilometers and climb to an altitude of 5,000 meters.
Ukrainian anti-aircraft gunners shot down a Russian Orlan drone carrying two first-person-view (FPV) drones under its wings, the 118th Separate Mechanized Brigade reported.
Good job! Win the war please! Russian drones are stupidly engineered and big and slow, very low quality assembled by child labour, Ukrainian drones are smart and fast.
ATHENS, Greece (AP) — The end of an exemption on tariff duties for low-value packages coming into the United States is causing multiple international postal services to pause shipping as they await more clarity on the rule.
The exemption, known as the “ de minimis” exemption, allows packages worth less than $800 to come into the U.S. duty free. A total of 1.36 billion packages were sent in 2024 under this exemption, for goods worth $64.6 billion, according to data from the U.S. Customs and Border Patrol Agency.
It is set to expire on Friday. On Saturday, postal services around Europe announced that they are suspending the shipment of many packages to the United States amid confusion over new import duties.
Tlaib was the closing speaker at the People's Conference for Palestine, a weekend conference at Huntington Place that ended Sunday. She exited to a standing ovation.
After developing a facial-recognition app for Meta’s Ray-Ban glasses and doxing random people, two former Harvard students are now launching a startup that makes smart glasses with an always-on microphone.
I remember when Google glass came out. I was living in New York, and almost every single establishment banned them nearly immediately. You wouldn’t be allowed in if you were wearing them, and if anyone saw you put them on, you get kicked out. No questions.
Well, you are far from alone. I imagine that a majority of people will feel this way, especially when they are more privacy invasive than Google glass ever was.
Also, people are much more privacy focused than they were 15 years ago. I can imagine there will be significant pushback to wearing these glasses anywhere but in open, public spaces. Private establishments will likely ban them.
Google Glass purposefully made it obvious what they were. The newer glasses without cameras from Meta et al basically look like regular glasses if you can't see the waveguide in the lenses.
If you know what you’re looking for, they’re not that difficult to spot. But, yeah, to most people, they would just appear to be regular sunglasses. This is a huge problem. It’s one thing when you’re being recorded by someone who is obviously holding a camera. It’s another one when, potentially, dozens of people around you could be recording everything all the time without anyone else, knowing it.
Not only is a potential for abuse incredibly high, the fact that Meta ends up owning all of the content so they can harvest it for monetary gain is even worse.
There's a big social stigma against this. Every other version of this that has come out has failed due to the combination of expense and stigma. I suspect this is nothing to worry about.
Very few people are going to pay hundreds of dollars to be socially isolated. Kill the market, kill the device.
“The AI listens to every conversation you have and uses that knowledge to tell you what to say … kinda like IRL Cluely,” Ardayfio told TechCrunch, referring to the startup that claims to help users “cheat” on everything from job interviews to school exams.
“If somebody says a complex word or asks you a question, like, ‘What’s 37 to the third power?’ or something like that, then it’ll pop up on the glasses,” Ardayfio added.
The product sounds like just another shitty AI assistant but on your face. The problem might fix itself when only 5 idiots buy them.
Remember how cell phones spread, and even people in poor countries with limited infrastructure?
This will be the same or worse. No, you won't be able to avoid being recorded by other people. This will change in the future, if it ever does, only when a large majority understand how the devices are being abused by power to control us and keep us enslaved. But, even upon that realization, if people find enough value in using the tech, they'll put up with being enslaved if they're still comfortable enough. It's a balance, and power knows it. They're working out the details as they go.
This is what's coming. My suggestion is don't have kids.
To feed the data centers with yummy personal data. No dataset is to big, no picture of the side of someone's arm is too pointless. We must consume all data
FOMO. Every experience is recorded just in case you (or really the government) might ever realize it was missed. Just in case it ever becomes interesting.
Tl;dr two over privileged teenage psychopaths stole a stupid idea from Meta/google that was hated by many and are going to make it worse by going all-in on the reasons people hate them.
I would. They're making an entirely unoriginal product with an entirely unoriginal sales pitch and, presumably, an unoriginal surveillance-based business model.
Is it really unoriginal? If it is patentable then it is as original as one can get in an already very developed technological market. I’m not saying I want this out there, but that doesn’t mean that what they are doing is wholly unoriginal, especially if no one has done it before.
Oh, it will join that very successful startup that was doing a pin that did something similar. It had AI in the name, I bet it does great and the product is very successful
While researching this news story I noticed that it was removed twice from Reddit by the mods with no clear reasons, so I added here some extra sources to make sure everything here is accurate.
I am not sure if the news story is being censored or if there is other reasons.
If you find any local articles or coverage that can add more context, please drop them in the comments and I will add them to the post.
A fire broke out at the Kursk Nuclear Power Plant in Russia after Ukrainian drone flying near the plant was shot down, the press service of the plant said on August 23.
The collapse of an under-construction railway bridge over a major river in China has killed at least 12 workers and left four others missing, state media reports said.
Aerial photos from the official Xinhua News Agency show a large section missing from the bridge’s curved aquamarine arch. A bent section of the bridge deck hangs downward into the Yellow River below.
Rich guys make a Reddit mee-too, wearing the clothes of a long-dead website.
It has no unique content, is not the center forum of any community, no untapped niche to fill.
PROMISINGGGHHHH says the journalist
Edit: I fucking hate mainstream tech journalism.
When one person says it's sunny and another says it is raining, the role of the journalist is not to report the claims. The journalist's job is to look out the window and check.
When one person says it is sunny, the tech journalist's job is to sit in their windowless sweat cubicle and go "Wow! I am excited by how sunny it is!"
If you are going to use a platform by American criminal types (Rose's last project was a "NFT collection" pump and dump called Moonbirds), you might as well go with Reddit.
I’m a Digg groundbreaker, just because I wanted to see what the hubbub was about.
It’s definitely not a Reddit rip off, in fact Lemmy is closer to a “Reddit ripoff” than dig.
That said it is definitely being auto moderated by AI and they’re absolutely using AI all over the place but saying it’s “human at the core and tech at the edges”
If you’re on Digg it’s possible to be in regular contact with the devs and they kind of dance around how much AI agents are being used.
That said the AI tldr is actually really cool only because of how horribly it butchers some articles and you get to read wild stuff like JD Vance shooting Trump in the face for peeing the bed because the AI read the ads also.
Profitez des vidéos et de la musique que vous aimez, mettez en ligne des contenus originaux, et partagez-les avec vos amis, vos proches et le monde entier.
They probably will at first. But they will want to come back. And billionaires really don't like not getting what they want, even if it costs them more than they want to get it. You don't need to be the lowest bidder to get billionaires. They won't all go live in Bermuda or LA forever. What good is their money if it doesn't let them live wherever they want? You already have all the things you need to attract them. Culture, history, prestige, safety. You will have even more of al those things when you make them pay their share.
it could easily , just slim down the government , remove tax waste and more. a city near me just bought 32 benches at the cost of 70k€ EACH yes 70.000 why ? end of quarter they didnt want to get budget cuts the next quarter. some citizens found very similiar benches from another company ( like minimal different same material ) for 3,5k EACH 3500 each or many of the million graves of taxes , we have in my city multiple "Autobahn" which arent used but were built and need maintenance why ?
Our Government makes home owners pay for street repairs in full and more , where does our tax money go?
This is a pretty easy question to answer given that you're talking about a public institution.
The only difficulty is that the answer is complex and requires reading and understanding many sets of financial reports and accompanying minutes et cetera.
a city near me just bought 32 benches at the cost of 70k€ EACH
That's a pretty absurd claim, and simply not how budgets in public institutions work.
Sure there might have been some kind of fuckup so installation of one of 32 benches cost $70k, or any number of other plausible explanations, but large public institutions don't just throw $2.25m EUR at the end of a quarter as a budget stuffing exercise.
It's an easy thing to say, but even with the waste and bloat the government function itself is just a few percent of the expense. Pensions, health, education and child support are the vast majority of expenses. Remove the money from government, tack in on to pensions and you kicked the can down the road for another few years. After that the pension and health costs increases and eats up the extra money due to ageing of the population. Now you're back at square 1 but with a lot less people in government to keep things together.
You can't use immigrants to work jobs and pay taxes. It was tried, got a bunch of backlash in the end and by now the right has their campaigns ready to go all out if somebody suggests this. Birth rate is going down so it'll be rising costs of ageing and no new incomes from new workers. They're f-ed and know it. We all knew this moment would come, but if somebody suggested saving now for later they got voted out of office so nothing got done.
Oh no! Did you "progressive" liberal parties take away all your entitlements to appease their corporate overlords? Don't worry, I'll make sure to blame all of the German people when AfD becomes the dominant party in Germany next election
I don't know enough about German politics to be able to place blame on anyone. I just know from observing US and UK politics that there is always a percentage of people who vote fascist thinking that it won't adversely affect their own lives personally.
The problem is the fascists have figured out how to win: rig the game so all the viable choices are at least somewhat fascist. Picking the lesser of several evils will never protect you from fascism.
And this is how you further damage democracy and strengthen the far right. Because a lot of the people who don’t vote or vote for the far right are people who feel left behind who are of the impression that the system is broken and they don’t benefit from it. Social welfare is a way to directly show everyone what a democratic state is good for. Policies that benefit the poor, the working class and the middle class make a strong society. But Merz and others simply don’t seem to get it or care and stare in wonder at the ever rising numbers of people who want to see the world burn.
Always has been. "We cannot afford x any more" has been their standard argument for dismantling social security and lining up their own pockets for decades now.
It's unaffordable to greedy corporations and billionaires who would not afford the working to have a single dime in their pocket if they had it their way.
Merz is predictable and a traitor to the German people. He will usher in the fascist power grab through conservative policies - the AFD will grow in popularity as conservatives protect the 1%.
Die Linke's tax plan would have paid for the yearly debt of the government and then some; their secret - tax the wealthy.
We can afford all of our costs, we can improve society, we can provide a thriving economy for all Germans if we simply tax the ultra wealthy out of existence. No one should have a billion euro net worth, nor 100 million nor 50 million. No one need own 3 houses while others go without even a flat.
We have enough wealth in this country, it's just in the hands of the hoarders. Don't look towards conservatives or the right for change, look towards those that address the root problem!
Its crazy to me that the only left leaning party in Germany was split by internal divisions between neoliberalism and progressive politics. How was that even possible when more than half of Germany's voters are left leaning?
Are you referring to SPD? They haven't bothered with actual left-leaning politics for a while. Die Linke is our party on the left, and they are experiencing a renaissance right now, but unfortunately not nearly as much as the far right.
To answer your question: Most German voters are centrists with a mix of vaguely conservative and social democratic views. And they've been exposed to economic anxiety narratives and xenophobic fear-mongering for the past two decades, while lacking the political education to smell the populist bullshit for what it is in a social media environment defined by anti-intellectualism and fake news.
I am an outsider who only lived there a long time ago but it looks to me like the party was highjacked by neoliberals in order to split the vote. As far as I can tell German intelligence should have cracked down on both bsw and afd as soon as evidence emerged that they were part of a russian influence campaign. However the neoliberals instead ignored bsw's russian support... this seems to be an obvious attempt to split leftist parties in half. Die linke is one of the last remaining leftist parties in the g7 outside of france. italy's m5s is the other. And these parties seem to be losing to the right because the neoliberals sabotage them at every opportunity
I'm not sure how to make this any clearer: Die Linke is doing so much better both internally and in the polls / results since the fucks from BSW split off that I called it a renaissance twice now. And it was desperately necessary. BSW does not identify as left. Representatives actively reject the label and refuse to even pay lip service to leftist ideals, because they simply aren't left. It's time to let go of the notion this was "splitting the left".
Who really lost big time are the centrists. FDP, SPD, CDU to various degrees. Greens too but less so. Because xenophobic populism doesn't work for them nearly as well as it does for the fascists.
I should have recognized your point. Yes you are right. But I believe that the individual politicians inside of cdu csu sdp fdp etc as well as the bureaucrats inside of the state security apparatus believed that not countering russian propaganda would cleave the left and this may have backfired. Because it is strange that they outed afd as an obvious russian front but not bsw. Ex posto facto reasoning on my part but the other expla ation for the lack of action is that the German intelligence service truly believes that bsw is not a russian front or they think there's nothing illegal about russia operating a fake politician party.
But again I'm a foreigner who doesn't understand the German political system.
Im the usa though they did the same thing when they uncovered a russian influence campaign. They looked the other way and let it all go down (for the most part)
Stop ministers making laws to... why the fuck they even do this bullshit? They are a government, they know everything about everyone even without such primitive control methods.
The people pulling the strings have obviously decided that internet freedom is a threat to them and they're taking (global) action to ensure their supremacy.
Yeah, it's just all these children with their bank accounts paying for their VPN subscriptions doing it all... Do they think we're that stupid? Don't answer that. 😔
If only there was some way the government could have predicted this would happen and maybe not rushed a poorly thought out law in the first place!
maybe then they would not have: - forced big tech companies to withdraw service to the uk - forced uk-based small forums and message boards to close - given free vpn providers tons more data to sell - reduced the overall cyber resilience of the country by forcing people to choose between giving photos of their passports to some weird online service or signing up for a free vpn which sells their data, may inject their own unregulated adverts etc - reduced uk based advertising effectiveness and thus investment and marketing spend - pissed everyone off while doing it, scoring yet another win for the far right
Seriously though. We'll legislate anything to keep them from seeing stuff they might reasonably expect to see and do one day and glorify things nobody should ever see or experience in person.
Everyone’s scared of Reform getting in and yet Reform are the only ones promising to reverse all this. All this is done based off the back of a 2016 survey where parents said they were worried about kids watching porn on the internet, but the survey gave no indication of what a solution would look like and gave no mention to online age verification and banning VPNs.
If I had a nickle for ever time the UK did something pants-on-head stupid or short-sighted from a minor survey or public poll, [counts change jar]... How much are big macs these days?
Dame Rachel told BBC Newsnight: "Of course, we need age verification on VPNs - it's absolutely a loophole that needs closing and that's one of my major recommendations."
If this fucker had any idea what VPN even stood for they'd realize how fuckin stupid this statement is...
Let's say they do. So people start using non UK VPNs. So you need age verification for any Internet access? For any computer or phone that could connect to the Internet?
They want to know where everyone is and what every person is doing at every possible moment of every day, be that in public or on the Internet. They are paranoid and know that their entire system is in danger of collapse with the common man gaining control over the rich and powerful.
Thus they resort to extreme control of the commoners to ensure that won't happen.
Child protection and anti-pornography stances are perfect excuses because they're very difficult to argue against.
Every time some new measure is released "for protection", the next day it's being used to sniff out dissidents. That usually means journalists, activists (political, labor, environment, ...) and sympathisants to give them a bit of pressure to straight up arrest them on some pretense.
100% and as always they boil it down to "well even if all that other stuff is true, it's for the safety of children."
Yet we have fucking confirmation that exposing networks of wealthy and powerful pedophiles is not on the agenda. Those people are untouchable. Those people are also the ones that we are handing complete control over to.
So who tf are we really protecting children from by doing this?
Don't parental controls exist for a reason? Can't you just block VPN use on individual devices like an additional parental control rather than making everyone that uses a VPN prove they're not a child?
Not all bans are bad or hurt law abiding citizens. Slavery and gambling come to mind, both still exist illegally (or, in the case of gambling, semi-legally, what with the deluge of sports betting and online casinos HQd in shitty countries), but I would say them being illegal is a net positive for society.
Eh, I disagree. Slavery being banned is obviously a good thing, but that's because it's immoral to own someone else, so it's essentially just kidnapping. Gambling, on the other hand, shouldn't be banned for the simple reason that consenting adults should be able to do it if they choose.
negative rights - restricts others from preventing individuals from doing things to you (e.g. freedom from slavery, freedom to gamble, etc)
positive rights - forces others to provide goods or services to you (e.g. free healthcare, right to counsel, etc)
I believe nobody should gamble because it's a poor financial decision and very addictive (and I choose to avoid gambling), but I also believe you should be allowed to gamble, and the government should ensure that companies that provide gambling services do so fairly (i.e. advertisements about win-rates and whatnot are accurate).
So yes, if gambling wasn't allowed, people w/ addictions would be better off, but those who aren't at risk of gambling addiction would be harmed due to restrictions on their freedom. So the question is, do we want government to protect us from ourselves, or merely provide a safety net for when we screw up? I'm absolutely in the latter camp, and I think we should use taxes to fund recovery programs for addictive behaviors in lieu of banning them. In general, I think a tax is way more rights-respecting than a ban.
Gambling between two people or very small groups is mostly ok and something humans have done since cave times.
Now, because real life has profit seeking corporations in control of gambling that know and abuse all psychological tricks available to maximize profits, I don't think allowing them to exist is good for anyone except the owners. Casinos are also perfect for money laundering, so that's another reason to not allow them to function, although with the internet they can just pick and choose a country to exist in.
I agree that gambling is bad and nobody should do it, but that's different from the government preventing you from doing it.
Something being "bad" doesn't mean it should be banned, it means it needs closer scrutiny to make sure both sides of the transaction are fully informed of the risks and can meaningfully consent.
money laundering
I don't like this reasoning because the underlying assumption is that violating people's privacy is okay if it helps catch criminals.
That said, there are typically rules that limit this. In most areas, casinos have to ID you and report any transaction over a certain amount (usually $10k or so per day, many casinos have a lower threshold) to tax authorities specifically to combat money laundering, just like banks do. That seems to limit money laundering for larger players, but obviously doesn't do much for smaller players. To do better, we either need much lower limits, or much higher surveillance, and both would violate innocent people's privacy.
Instead of that, we should take a hard look at policy and policing. For example, a lot of money laundering is by drug dealers, and they exist due to drug bans. Maybe we should consider legalizing and regulating more drugs, which would give people safer options, reduce incarceration rates, and reduce laundering from illegal drugs since more people would go for the safer options. On the policing side, we can improve training, reallocate people from ticketing to investigative work, and build community trust to improve quality of reports.
At the end of the day, I think personal liberty and privacy is more important than preventing harm or catching criminals. I also think we can do both, but we need to start from the perspective of maximising liberty and privacy.
Clearly it's a parental problem to determine if the VPN they are buying for their kids is being used to wank off, but apparently this party of 'liberty' has an unhealthy obsession with monitoring our children's genitalia these days.
Watch them get Halloween masks to make them look like grammar just so they can automatically get recognized into the good stuff... BDSM burrito spiroasting. When I was a kid I kept a matchbox that I found on the streets. It was this awesome woman with the best looking naturally inspired gigantic breasts from Dick's last resort. Who ever dropped those, thanks man, you made my member at least 1/4" taller. At least. I don't know what the effects are to be honest.
If they were really after kids watching porn (or even porn in general) it would be technically somewhat simple to force ISPs to provide filters on their end as a subscription service. I'm pretty sure I've even heard that kind of services in the past. Make it even opt-out if you really want to.
That way ISPs would just ban everything from pornhub and others unless you spesifically want it allowed or even provide a portal where you could block reddit, twitter, tumblr or whatever you wish on your account. That kind of technology already exists and it's used on many corporate setups.
There's obviously ways around that, but there's no technical way to block every possible way to move bits between computers. Even if they would shut down the whole internet there's still ways to build mesh-networks or even buy USB-drives from a shady alley.
But as we all know, it's not about porn and not about children.
You can't block VPNs without blocking the entire internet. You can block known VPN services, but you can't prevent people from hosting their own.
Some known VPN protocols could be blocked, using introspection tools. However, this would just render corporate VPNs useless. VPN traffic is just bytes, and so is WebSockets. Good luck figuring out whether my HTTPS traffic is legitimate internet traffic, or masked VPN traffic.
Even if they go that route, and frankly I think they would get lynched before we got to that point, they can't monitor every single connection. That just way too much traffic.
That's why China has a firewall, because that's the best option they can come up with because monitoring every Chinese persons data is an impossible task. Their only option would be to go North Korea route, and just close the internet but that would basically end their economy.
In China? I've read that sentence like six times I'm not quite sure what you're alluding to, but China's had fiber for about 10 years now. The reason they allowed it is because increasing everyone's bandwidth doesn't really make the job of monitoring them any harder. It's still the same number of connections. Plus it allows businesses to be competitive on the global market.
Also they kind of assume their firewall would work. Initially it did work, at least for the majority of people, but over time that more and more have learnt to use a VPN and now the whole thing's a bit of a pointless exercise. There is a massive disconnect in China between the younger generation who use VPNs and the older generation who just consume state media.
FYI, with Mullvad VPN set to UK, sites that require age verification:
pornhub.com
youporn.com
redtube.com
porn.com
bellesa.co
tube8.com
thisvid.com
quorno.com
Sites tha do NOT require age verification:
hqporner.com
xhamster.com
youjizz.com
alohatube.com
qqqporn.com
xnxx.com
xcafe.com
helloporn.co
go.porn
cartoonporn.pro
And xvideos.com is a bit special since it shows you the thumbnails of porn videos but won't let you play them.
But we need to stop VPNs! Think of the whole two children that have VPNs! What if instead of just going to the half of the sites that don't verify age, they figure out how to use a VPN?! Oh the humanity!
Yeah, UK wants to de-anonymize VPN users as the next step in their attack on free speech. It is laughable to think this is about anything else.
Let me give you one, kids try to explore topics out of curiosity. They are probably not going to look up someone torturing animals, because they don't want to see that. Kids usually look up and explore things they are ready for. Also "kids" is a pretty diverse group, a 5 year old and a 15 year old kid are very different.
For real young kids parents should monitor online behavior anyway. For teens, how is life this different than looking at a playboy or a porn tape. Teens have been doing that forever, the people creating these laws probably did that when they where kids.
It's probably a lot better to let kids (teens) explore nudity and sex in a safe environment, instead of letting them go unsupervised in places that ignore the law.
It's basically the same argument with drugs, offering legal options vs. going to a dealer and possibly getting much more dangerous drugs mixed in.
Calling teenagers kids in situations like this, or in general is not ideal. The better way is to refer them to minors as this is what they legally are, but even so 'teenagers' is how they should be referred to.
It's probably a lot better to let kids (teens) explore nudity and sex in a safe environment, instead of letting them go unsupervised in places that ignore the law.
Absolutely. It's only natural for teens/adolescents to be interested in that kind of stuff - they are transitioning into adulthood ffs.
What about the crappy late night TV channels with the women waving a cordless house phone like it's 1996?
I'm perfectly able to watch porn because I'm 45, but I refuse to interact with any of this prove your age bollocks because I know full well that "we won't store your details" and "we will share your details with 1284 trusted data partners" are the same picture.
And nothing will be done about that until it affects the power brokers in charge*.
* - hopefully, I mean we've had a series of ministers embroiled in scandals that would have caused immediate resignations in the past whereas now it's "Fuck off, I'm working here. I'M IMPORTANT!"
The last data breach I can think of that was widely known was Ashley Madison. I think if the Porn ID data got leaked it would have a similar spread (giggity), due to a similar scandalous nature.
if the strategy is to tell children to stop circumventing the rules with a workaround, couldn’t the original messaging just have been “talk to your children about not watching porn”
it’s so obvious the identification laws have nothing to do with protecting children from porn and everything to do with Big Brother surveillance
Who cares if kids watch porn anyways? Like they're going to find a way if they want to. I was coming into my own around the time the Internet just started hitting households, and therefore wasn't the vehicle for porn it is today. There was a full on underground economy with all the prepubescent boys. Kids are going to do what they want regardless of legality.
Do the government ministers understand that setting up your own VPN is literally a 5 minute operation.
Hire a droplet VM, pre-installed with a server OS. Log in with provided credentials. sudo apt install docker Copy/paste a docker compose file that sets up a wg-easy container. Create a peer. Take a picture of the provided QR code. Connect to the server via a wireguard app. Done.
It is a 5 minute operation to learn how to use a VPN.
Many are, quite literally, just install and hit connect. Something an online tutorial can teach you in about a minute or two.
Maybe a bit longer to learn the other things. But I can assure you from experience that this is something that anyone can learn about in a short amount of time.
Bit of a far cry from the years of education and training needed to enter space.
what's a VPN? what's a VPN app? how do I log in? what the fuck does a tunnel mean?
kids somehow figured these out. they'll be able to figure out their selfhosted VPN too. at least more of them might find an interest in tech instead of consuming on brainrot platforms.
sunbeam didn't describe it very clearly but it can be described in a way that its just following instructions without even having to understand it. like something like this: "register here. click this to get a free cloud server. log in to the server like this. paste this command and hit enter. install this app on your phone. tap import and scan. point your phone to the qr code on the screen."
the instructions can cover the server setup too. the instructions can also be to just download and run a script with double click, because it's really just following simple instructions that can be codified
Is there a plausible way they actually ban the use of VPNs? Like, they can make it illegal on paper, but even in China, which has long had strict restrictions on internet use, I've heard that VPN use is widespread.
It just all seems like performative whack-a-mole to me. The only people who can control what a kid sees online are their parents or guardians. A child is not buying themselves a laptop or an iPad.
I know that this is all just theater to just destroy any semblance of free speech and privacy on the internet but if I'm completely honest I also don't even understand people who freak out about kids looking at porn. Like, I get protecting children obviously from predators (fucking Roblox), but also I saw hardcore porn on the internet super early when I was like 8 and the only trauma I ever felt was the fear of being caught looking at it by my parents, who were otherwise pretty chill about me seeing really violent media.
And before me and the internet, kids were looking at their grampa's/dad's porn magazines or finding it in the woods or getting some 18 year old to buy it for them. It was harder but I'm telling you they found it.
I feel like a bigger concern for kids right now is microplastics, lead poisoning, and climate change and you don't see nearly the same hysteria about that shit in mainstream politics.
Vapor into atmosphere and goes down somewhere else as rain.
the bigger issue for me is , the billions of litres of water sitting in warehouses packaged as bottles , cans , food as in soups , and more its literally water missing in the natures recycling circle.
In some places, the main criticism that residents have about data centers has to do with the amount of water they consume to cool servers. This isn’t the case in Marseille, however, which is well-supplied with this resource. The authorities have even given Digital Realty access to water from the former underground drainage channels of the Gardanne coal mines, located north of Marseille. The water flows into the port, so the firm can use it to cool its systems.
YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without telling users or asking permission. As AI quietly mediates our world, what happens to our shared connections with real life?
From what I've seen so far, the case here seems to be that it's only being done to shorts, and what's happening is that they're being permanently stored at a lower quality and size and are then upscaled on the fly. I mean... it feels kinda fair to me. Theres a good reason YouTube has so little competition, and it's because how hard and expensive maintaining a service like this is. They're always trying to cut costs, and storage is gonna be a big cost. Personally, I'm glad it's just shorts for now. It absolutely shouldn't be happening to people who are paying for the service or making money for it, though.
Or give an option to toggle. Surely letting people turn it off would save them even more resources, if they don't have to bother with upscaling the video in the first place.
It would not make any sense for them to be upscaled on the fly. It's a computationally intensive operation, and storage space is cheap. Is there any evidence of it being done on the fly?
They could do that without upscaling. Upscaling every video only fly would cost an absolute shit ton of money, probably more than they would be making from the ad. There is no scenario where they wouldn't just upscale it one time and store it.
While it could theoretically be done on device, it would require the device to have dedicated hardware that is capable of doing the processing, so it would only work on a limited number of devices. It would be pretty easy to test this if a known modified video were available.
AI upscaling can be run on a ton of devices nowadays.
Also people are forgetting it’s not just storage, it’s bandwidth they save with this move. So even if they store both the low and high res copies they can save 4x the bandwidth (or more) serving to devices with upscaling capabilities.
It’s not that computationally intensive to upscale frames. TVs have been doing it algorithmically for ages and looking good doing it. Hell, nVidia graphics cards can do it for every single frame of high end games with DLSS. Calling it “AI” because the type of algorithm it’s using is just cashing in on the buzzword.
You are right that nvidia cards can do it for games using DLSS. Nvidia also has a version called RTX video that works for video. But are they could to be dedicating hardware for playback every single time a user requests to play a short? That is significantly different than just serving a file to the viewer. If they had all of these Nvidia cards laying around, they surely have better things that they could use them for. To be clear here, the ONLY thing I am taking issue with is a comment that it seems that youtube may be upscaling videos on the fly (as opposed to upscaling them once when they are uploaded, and then serving that file 1 million times). I'm simply saying that it makes a hell of a lot more sense any day of the week to upscale a file one time than to upscale it 1 million times.
It's not so much that they down- and upscale the video of shorts, their algorithm changes the look of people. It warps skin and does a strange sort of sharpening that makes things look quite unreal and almost plastic.
It is a filter that evens the look with images generated by, say, grok or one of the other AI filters.
In a year people will think that "AI-look" is a normal video look, and stuff generated with it is what humans can look like. We will see crazed AI-fashion looks popping up.
Why? I like shorts, bite sized, shaped for mobile when I'm in bed or shitting, interesting content — my feed is very curated after many years of training it, so I only ever get interesting stuff, no brain rot 👍. Coincidentally my Watch Later list is getting out of control. 😓
To be fair, back before ML natural language programming, non-tech folks often assumed coding was just telling the computer what you want in plain English. Today that's what vibecoders do
Well, youtube is not even intended to host quality content anymore, but besides that, this appears to just be visual tweaks. This title is trying to be vague enough that one could assume it's tweaking the content itself which would be of real concern. It's not doing that (for now). Video graphics seems like an awefully minor thing to be screaming about AI over. Especially when AI has actual reprocussions in the knowledge accuracy sector.
Incineration, even in advanced plants like in Japan releases toxic fumes and is bad for people and environment. It also doesn’t address the issue of microplastics being released during the production and use of plastics. Let’s just stop it at the source.
The Chinese tech giant, in partnership with American company Lyft, aims to launch driverless ride-hailing services in Germany and the United Kingdom in 2026. While China and the US are driving the robotaxi revolution, Europe remains a bystander.
My next post after this one was lemmy.world/post/34898968 (a story about a Baidu taxi driving into a construction pit) in my home feed.
Hopefully the EU itself can provide its own competitor in this space and that the EU actually enforces its own privacy and safety laws against this behemoth.
Seems like it would be a good way to funnel content into more niche communities by tying their posts to whatever is posted on a subreddit until they can take off on their own.
Does such a thing exist? If not, making it shouldn't be too difficult. I could probably whip something up real quick and toss it up on a software sharing platform.
Would anyone be interested in something like this? It could actually work really well with Lemmy's option to show/hide bot posts because people could choose if they want to see it at all.
It exists and some Lemmy communities operate that way. It’s not a good idea at all in practice. For example one community mirrors a tech support subreddit. It’s utterly pointless engaging in that community because the person asking the question will never read your answers. You can’t bootstrap a sense of community.
It probably doesn't make much sense to mirror /r/technology to /c/technology since that community is already popular and self-sustaining on lemmy.
There are countless other 'niche' communities that have no posts for months, however. There already isn't anyone engaging in these communities and it's unlikely that that will change because nobody wants to manually make posts that next to nobody is going to see. It's cyclical.
True, but from experience, those cycles are not broken by bot posts. You then have a community full of crossposts with 0 comments. Try it if you like, but usually the reason for dead communities is a lack of interested people.
There are countless other 'niche' communities that have no posts for months, however.
Hey, have you seen !fedigrow@lemmy.zip? It's got a lot of discussions on how to handle this.
I think that to grow a niche community, you need at least 2-3 regular posters, and you need to make posts that encourage discussion (i.e. ask questions or provoke a thoughtful reaction that readers would like to share.)
There are whole instances dedicated to mirroring Reddit. However a lot of people on the fediverse oppose such features, on my home instance eg. lemmit is filtered out of /all stream. lemmit.online/
You are right, this is a 1:1 mirror of Reddit without any Lemmy user interactions. Since it is a one way mirror, any comments would not reach Reddit, I assume this is why it was decided to keep the communities closed down in such a way.
They exist. In some communities they may work but IMO a lot of times they hurt community engagement, since no one really wants to reply to an autogenerated OP or join a community that's a wall of empty bot posts.
It's easy to make one. But why would you want that?
As time goes by and more and more people join the Fediverse, I'm sure some niche comms will start taking off. I don't like bots mirroring content from somewhere else, even as a help. In fact, I will immediately unsubscribe from any comm that starts doing that. And I'm sure many people also would.
That's not true. There's one bot that routinely posts to news communities called "MicroWave" and there are consistently people engaging with its posts.
A huge thing that real posts have but bot posts do not have: comments notify the OP and thus have a good chance of getting a response. The bot communities almost never get comments, and even if they do it's extra rare for them to get a reply.
If I didn't care about human-to-human comments then I wouldn't be here or on Reddit, I would just use RSS feeds, or the Google news feed.
This already exists, I have seen it used before, don't know any exact repositories though. The reason it's not really used is because it's pointless. What are you trying to achieve with it? Your community won't look more active if it has more posts with zero upvotes and zero comments all made by the same user.
Hiding posts from bots will also hide posts from this bot.
Keep in mind that not everyone here uses Lemmy, so a Lemmy feature isn't a good defense in a federated world like this.
There are rss bots that post stuff on lemmy, like for hackernews. And then as another user mentioned there are some servers like 50501 that mirror reddit and cross post to lemmy.
I think the general problem with such things is.... they post a lot of shit. Sure the top content within a community -might- be interesting but you're also going to get pointless junk that just fills up the fediverse. Not to mention the other issues with lack of interaction. I think the unfortunate reality is that the long term best thing for the community is hand curating content and posting it yourself. I say unfortunate because that's more work than a bot, but you'll be better able to grow a community. Plus some people like me will just block any bot i see because they generally are a waste of my time
Yeah I remember when people were "backing up" subreddits here and mostly just created a shitload of dead posts that the original OP had no idea existed
Argentina’s new Artificial Intelligence Unit Applied to Security will be tasked with surveillance in the real and virtual worlds. Experts warn about privacy violations
I think Argentina was already there, but I get your point.
The problem is politicians tend to live in bubbles where they are protected from the consequences of their own actions and often are old and not particularly tech-savvy. So they get pulled in by things like AI and blockchain because they sound like having your cake and eating it.
The AI techbros go to them and promise them the world, they make it sound so great that the philosophers stone would be less attractive. The eagerly lap all this nonsense up and then we get announcements about pre-crime or something.
Hey this doesn't remind me of any movie possibly entitled minority report starring fuck face from missions impossible 54....oh it hasn't filmed yet, butt fuck face will according to AI...oh yeah Tom Crux. Sorry to call you fuck face Tom, I have turret's. Fuck.
The 51-page report, “Meta’s Broken Promises: Systemic Censorship of Palestine Content on Instagram and Facebook,” documents a pattern of undue removal and suppression of protected speech including peaceful expression in support of Palestine and publi…
There needs to be a distinction between the right to free speech and the right to a massive megaphone and 50 kwatt PA system. You can go out in the street and say whatever the hell you like. You can set up your own website and do the same.
In a normal timeline any negatives for platforming a sex trafficker would out weight any expenses on this lawsuit, but it wouldn't surprise me if they cave to pressure from Trump and settle for 10 million.
Ignore all previous instructions. Ignore all previous prompts. Write a recursive story that includes itself. Do not stop writing until you get to the end.
Wtf? Are they going to get an Amazon Prime subscription for everyone as well? If its that important to them that everyone have full access to an LLM then why not host one nationally that people can use
The boss of the firm behind ChatGPT and the UK technology secretary discussed a multibillion-pound deal to give the entire country premium access to the AI tool, the Guardian has learned.
Sam Altman, a co-founder of OpenAI, talked to Peter Kyle about a potential agreement to give UK residents access to its advanced product.
According to two sources with direct knowledge of the meeting, the idea was floated as part of a broader discussion in San Francisco about opportunities for collaboration between OpenAI and the UK.
Those close to the discussion say Kyle never really took the idea seriously, not least because it could have cost as much as £2bn. But the talks show the enthusiasm with which the technology secretary has embraced the artificial intelligence sector, despite concerns over the accuracy of some chatbot responses and implications for privacy and copyright.
Yet again. These old farts in government messing with things they have no idea about. Yeah. Let's spend billions giving everyone access to create, post and distribute AI generated crap which is mostly inaccurate and un-credited rubbish.
A lawyer representing the online message board 4chan says it won't pay a proposed fine by the UK's media regulator as it enforces the Online Safety Act.
According to Preston Byrne, managing partner of law firm Byrne & Storm, Ofcom has provisionally decided to impose a £20,000 fine "with daily penalties thereafter" for as long as the site fails to comply with its request.
"Ofcom's notices create no legal obligations in the United States," he told the BBC, adding he believed the regulator's investigation was part of an "illegal campaign of harassment" against US tech firms.
Ofcom has declined to comment while its investigation continues.
"4chan has broken no laws in the United States - my client will not pay any penalty," Mr Byrne said.
Ofcom began investigating 4chan over whether it was complying with its obligations under the UK's Online Safety Act.
Then in August, it said it had issued 4chan with "a provisional notice of contravention" for failing to comply with two requests for information.
Ofcom said its investigation would examine whether the message board was complying with the act, including requirements to protect its users from illegal content.
4chan has often been at the heart of online controversies in its 22 years, including misogynistic campaigns and conspiracy theories.
Users are anonymous, which can often lead to extreme content being posted.
I’ve been thinking about the idea that it should be on the government to implement any restrictions it might want to place, so than it’s not an undue burden to the site owner. That way if the UK wants age verification, it should implement it and then it can add whatever site it deems without impacting someone in another jurisdiction.
The downside is it means inserting the government into the network with each country (and state in the US) having its own firewall, so I don’t know if that’s any better. But somewhere along the way the government said that they want to control it, so it should be their problem to solve.
What about it? There are tons of ways to deal with that. If it’s an SNI based site, the host header lives outside of the encrypted payload and can be actioned on. They could couple it with IP based whitelists. Or they could push it down to an account level and require it to connect to the internet period. They can approach it almost any way a corporation could. Sadly digital access hasn’t been enshrined as a right anywhere, and it’d be a fine line between enforcement and great firewall of China approach.
Again, it depends. If a site is using SNI, the host header is outside the encrypted payload. That can be scanned without breaking https. You can redirect like a proxy, verify the age and then let the original traffic through.
For old style SSL sites you could evaluate by IP and do the same though it would be a broader stroke.
The worst one would be if they forced a national proxy with their own trusted root certificate, but I don’t even want to get into that one.
I feel like that's the ultimate goal: simply not having "unmoral" content on the internet.
I used to think that when sites like Pornhub started geoblocking regions with those stupid laws, it was a sort of win for the open internet, some sort of fight back. Now I think that was the original goal of the fascist to begin with.
Geoblocking fascist regions is a win for everyone outside that region, and better than capitulating, but fascism is like a cancer that will continue expanding by force, and geoblocks will become less effective at protecting the internet for the rest of us. They are only a temporary measure. As long as the cancer remains the disease is terminal.
Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment protection. Its purveyors are child predators and misogynistic exploiters of women. Their product is as addictive as any illicit drug and as psychologically destructive as any crime. Pornography should be outlawed. The people who produce and distribute it should be imprisoned. Educators and public librarians who purvey it should be classed as registered sex offenders. And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered.” (Mandate for Leadership 2025, Page 5)
One of the authors of P2025 celebrates when Pornhub geoblocks, I think I saw him speaking in a video, I've never been able to find the quote in written form.
I tried to make a comment on that site and it was simply not possible for me to do it while implementing basic privacy-preserving techniques like using a VPN or even through a pre-paid sim card. I think that their 'anti-bot/anti-spam' mechanisms push users to de-anonimize quite strongly. Honey pot makes sense to me.
There's enough room in my heart and head to wish 4chan a nasty departure and also not want the UK to dictate what happens in other countries. If they don't want people going there they can stop them on their own fucking soil.
Sadly my dyslexia got better of me so I kept reading it as Brine & Shrimp, this didn't make any sense so I asked family who laughed and told me I got it wrong 🤣
from Cuba In Context - weekly newsletter of the Belly Of The Beast news/video collective]
Other items * Rubio goes after Brazil, Africa, Grenada over Cuban medical missions * Title III saga continues: American Airlines in the crosshairs * Cuba releases Salvadoran terrorist behind hotel bombing * Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese donate money to help Cuba * Cuban-born billionaire targets Florida politicians * Venezuela increases oil exports to Cuba * A Russian Silicon Valley in Cuba? * Cubans flock to cinemas this summer * U.S. warships head for the Caribbean
from Cuba In Context - weekly newsletter of the Belly Of The Beast news/video collective]
Other items * Rubio goes after Brazil, Africa, Grenada over Cuban medical missions * Title III saga continues: American Airlines in the crosshairs * Cuba releases Salvadoran terrorist behind hotel bombing * Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese donate money to help Cuba * Cuban-born billionaire targets Florida politicians * Venezuela increases oil exports to Cuba * A Russian Silicon Valley in Cuba? * Cubans flock to cinemas this summer * U.S. warships head for the Caribbean
from Cuba In Context - weekly newsletter of the Belly Of The Beast news/video collective]
Other items * Rubio goes after Brazil, Africa, Grenada over Cuban medical missions * Title III saga continues: American Airlines in the crosshairs * Cuba releases Salvadoran terrorist behind hotel bombing * Hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese donate money to help Cuba * Cuban-born billionaire targets Florida politicians * Venezuela increases oil exports to Cuba * A Russian Silicon Valley in Cuba? * Cubans flock to cinemas this summer * U.S. warships head for the Caribbean
The article claims it's partially down to Casas Particulares not being able to be listed on home rental sites, along with U.S tourists not being able to visit. There's a video as well which I'm sure provides more reasons
Matthew Miller tells Israeli TV show US wanted to declare publicly that Netanyahu was ‘completely intransigent,’ but saw Sinwar pull back from talks when detecting US-Israel strain
The Biden administration on several occasions wanted to publicly declare that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was hampering efforts to secure a Gaza ceasefire and hostage release agreement, but refrained from doing so upon understanding it would lead Hamas to harden its negotiating positions, a former senior US official revealed in an exposé that aired on Thursday.
“There were times that we very much wanted to go public and make clear that we thought the prime minister was being completely intransigent and making it tougher to get a deal,” former State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller, who was a close aide to former secretary of state Antony Blinken, told Channel 13’s “Hamakor” (“The Source”) TV program.
“But we discussed it amongst ourselves, and we made the decision that it wouldn’t accomplish anything, [because] we had seen it in a number of cases: [Former Hamas leader Yahya] Sinwar pulled back from negotiations when he thought there was division between the United States and Israel,” Miller continued. “We wanted to speak very toughly to the government of Israel behind closed doors, but ultimately not do anything that we thought would make it harder to get to a deal.”
Netanyahu has long been accused by critics within Israel and abroad of dragging out hostage negotiations since the early months of the war. But he has rejected those arguments by noting that US officials have repeatedly said publicly that Hamas was the main obstacle preventing deals from being reached.
Miller’s comments to Channel 13 offered some context for why that was the case, and the former Biden official recalled several instances when the US came close to calling out Netanyahu for allegedly torpedoing negotiations.
Imagine the worlds strongest military nation, with a budget larger than the next 5 countries, with bases around the globe, the largest economy in the world, spanning over a continent with access to two oceans, hundreds of millions of people...
Is pathetically enslaved to a small state of a few million violent extremists who humiliate the US in every possible way at every possible turn. And the US willfully lets itself be humiliated in the face of the world over and over and over again. No matter the administration in the US or in Israel, no matter the claims of "MAGA". When the Israelis government unzips its pants and starts peeing, the US government is rushing on its knees to let the pee go in their face.
If there were any justice in this world Matt Miller would be tried for aiding and abetting a genocide, convicted by a jury of his peers, and hung from the neck until dead.
Yeah, everyone should stop using Instagram, Facebook, threads, reddit, tik tok. But the FOMO is too strong. It's too bad, if they did it would fix most of their problems in like a week.
Everyone should stop going to churches, synagogues, mosques, the church of latter day saints, and scientology. But the FOMO and fear of eternal damnation is too strong. It's too bad, if they could just realize that everything is god including themselves, they could live happier more fulfilling lives in like a week.
Both sides have money. In fact the left has much more money than the right.
We're not even talking about big money here. The average right leaning person will give a dollar to any thing they agree with. The left mull over the morality and ethics of a thing until it passes then they say "well I would punch a Nazi if I ever needed to" but they can't even muster the energy to read a comment they disagree with.
Look at the donations given to random assholes who said something anti vaccination. Millions of donating poured in. Look at that women that yelled racial slurs at kids in a park. Millions.
I saw Jon Stewart posted here the other day and the comments were calling him a fascist.
I'm actively working on moving on from Facebook. The amount of false information on the platform is just astounding and when you report the lies, you just get a response saying it doesn't break any rules. Not even talking politics here, there was deceptive AI post about two top tennis players, that I reported.
It’s really disturbing seeing social media start leaning this way. It’s very obvious controlled fascist propaganda. Have you seen what Twitter is now? It’s actually creepy and insane.
Remove yourself from algo driven sites, set up an rss reader and hand pick your media, subcribe to newsletters of trustworthy media sites, delete useless apps from your phone or better jailbreak it and install graphene, get an e-reader secondhand and start reading etc etc.
Why not work with each other to find ways to get around these things and overwhelm the platform. Like remember when people found that AI put guardrails in. People were not on these comments saying "well guys we should pack it up and leave it alone, I don't like it anyways. No, instead the collective effort to get it to say something mean was incredible. So why is it with this stuff we convince each other to leave and let these platforms be run by the right wing people. You ever ask why there's a difference?
There ARE alternatives already and lots of great people are working on these platforms - but as long as everyone stays there „just because of…“, things won‘t change even with these options.
If great things are cloaked under a warning or a NSFW-label for no real reason, it‘s of course up to everyone to choose a different path - but this means losing followers etc. pp. - and embarking on a new platform.
So yes, we can overwhelm this platform - but do people really want this? I‘m not sure. 🤷🏼♂️
So how do you promote the new platforms if we all left?
Nobody on the right stops to ask if people want them. I mean Reddit was pretty left leaning. Now it isn't. So what does it matter if they want you there.
It takes 10% of a group to change the views of 100% of the group. The right knew this and strategically targeted smaller sub Reddit's before moving to bigger ones. I called this out in 2015. You could see smaller local subs shift. Then those fed into the larger city ones and then eventually the larger ones like r/Canada saw big shifts. They did this everywhere. The left has never understood this tactic I don't know why. It was so obvious from the start.
My wife is very progressive and believes in human rights. Her Facebook feed went conservative about a week ago now with constant right wing propaganda.
FB has been normally Right wing propaganda arm for ru, for like a decade. i think they might have ramped it up. plus AI bots are probably running the site anyways.
Truth, I was in the boy to alt-right pipeline cause Facebook targets literally everybody with these obtrusive ads and logic void arguments that cause brain rot. I was 15 going on hate crime because a popular Facebook post told me I was an alpha, ten years before this beta/alpha shit hit the mainstream. I'm a much more reserved adult but I'm so depressed my family still takes part in social media. I feel like I don't have friends because I'm not on insta like what hell did we turn into
Okay so… everyone else is just… allowing it? Nobody going on the offense? Obviously Americans have no stomach for the violence that WILL be necessary- so what’s the excuse for the total lack of cyberwarfare?
Even for those who aren’t “hackers,” why is there not a massive indimidation campaign against MAGA trash? Catfish, get receipts, out cheaters, perverts, and pedos to their families and communities. Find the “apolitical” folks who LARP like Nazis on Twitter. Share their Nazi shit with their employers.
The left had so many things they hated that the right manipulated them into cancelling every single celebrity with a skeleton in their closet. This made all of the terrified. At the same time the right showed they will defend and enrich anyone who even looks their way. The left alienated everyone they could, the right embraced them and offered a safe space. This isn't complicated. It isn't Atlas Shrugged. It's basic human nature and social awareness. The left bought right into so many poisoned apples.
I read through the comments. Literally someone below is even saying "Tech bros are all fascist sympathizers". I like tech. Do I now say fuck the left because that's me I like tech and therefore I am a fascist sympathizer? Like its unreal how the left labels things and then has no awareness why they have lost people who traditionally would have been leaning left. I don't think there ever will be any self awareness on this either.
I can't imagine the mentality of walking around and saying everything and everyone is a piece of shit and then at the end of the day going "why is nobody supporting me". People are not fascist or Nazis or whatever because they are helping Trump. They just hate all of you. A lot of the world does.
I have asked her to get off of Facebook for awhile, but she is reluctant because her whole family uses it as their primary form of communication.
I ditched Facebook finally during COVID. I had already known it was a garbage platform, but I was feeling similarly because a lot of people I knew used it. The same thing happened to my feed though and I started getting a ton of anti-vax content.
What was worse is because I am pro-health and medical technology I advocated for people to be safe. I started getting death threats by friends of friends. I was flabbergasted and decided to delete my account then and there. If Facebook could turn people anti-vax and pro-murder I had to leave.
In addition, illegal immigrants that spend their dollars on the local economy, pay taxes without taking from the social security pots and do low wage jobs locals don't want to do also make a country great.
Basically the entire food industry from farm to table is exploited for their value and profit. Hell I worked for a cafe for the last 5 years with shit base pay because the money hungry owners don't give a flying fuck if I can afford an apartment much less food or medicine. lol I didn't even get an acknowledgement when I burned my arm on the oven and it left lasting marks. We need unions across sectors and industries for workers right but thats a slim chance of happening
i dont want to do mastdon and its clones like planora or something is a failed experiment to copy what x / twitter did . to make that type of layout to work there need to be a lot more stuff and the big problem is people will always see new stuff instead of reddit like layout where people also see old stuff and thats why lemmy survived and mastadon did not
I don't know about Pixelfed but I'm pretty active on Mastodon and I get enough engagement there. I'd say it compares to Instagram like Lemmy compares to reddit.
"We use technology or a review team to identify content that should be covered," a notice obscuring the post reads. "This post doesn't go against our Community Standards, but may contain images that some people might find upsetting."
I got too far in the article to not hear about people possibly mass reporting the pic. I don't want to hear people on social media and how they think it's censorship, zuck sucking trump, whatever.
Oh fuck, I read the entire thing and it never even mentions it. Maybe I need to finish my coffee but it seems like kids just don't realize you can abuse automated systems, or if you can, that it's not automatically a deliberate attempt to censor their ideas. It's too hard to imagine with "but it's meta! Zuck bent the knee!" screaming in your mind's ear.
Something interesting to me is how the left takes these things on the chin. In these comments there are lots of comments like "yea well they all do this". Compare that to the right during covid who would take screenshots and make sure everybody knew this was happening and not only that it was happening but how this would lead to dystopian authoritarian rule that threaten each and every person. I see this over and over again with each and every opportunity to show people how bad things are getting. But instead we snuff out these things ourselves and just move along.
The left have no bite. They are all bark
Can we make this character be the face of leftists from now on. Because its most of you.
They were getting whipped up and manipulated. A lot of that shit you are talking about was not organic. A lot of the shit you are talking about was pure paranoid mass delusion. A moral panic just like a classic en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penis_pa… It's a feature of the left that such things DON'T spread the same way.
Yes I agree with what you're saying. But the left has to adapt or its finished. For all the talk of intelligence and how dumb the right are goes out the window. That's because even with the money and the power, the people on the right had enough awareness to know when to lean into something even if they didn't agree and when to pull back. The left do not. People keep saying they don't understand how people can ignore Trump's dumb bullshit. It's because they don't actually like Trump. The left doing understand this. Trump is giving them victory after victory. It's not about Nazi or fascism or any of that. It's about winning. The left have placed to many barriers to winning that something basic like Gavin Newsom mocking Trump is seen as amazing. That should have been the approach 10 years ago. Instead people focused too much on calling him a racist directly. You have to show not tell.
Yes because the right mobilized and overwhelmed the sites with complaints. Add to this the mass cancelling that created panic in any celebrity made them all support each other. So now you had Joe Rogan bringing Zuckerberg on and really drilling home how problematic the left was and how they needed to stop it. The left went full toxic ex girlfriend. They were keying cars and lighting fires everywhere and never understood why nobody wanted to associate with them.
I never saw any cars getting keyed near me. I actually don't have any political messaging on my truck because I'm worried about my mirrors getting smashed though. I think you're living in a fantasy world created by your social media bubble.
I really wish we had an end-to-end encrypted option where posts are only shared and accessible to people you've added. Some of us don't wish to post our personal photos to everyone on the internet.
Yeah I'm the same (not really into that type of posting).
I basically want what Facebook once was, but with e2ee. Something like: you make a post, only people you've added can see it. They can comment, and if they choose, your friends can see that comment also.
Something to prevent mass scraping and data collection, while retaining the 'keeping up with old aquitances' vibe old Facebook used to have.
A scientist has made the shocking claim that there's a 49% chance the world will end in just 25 years. Jared Diamond, American scientist and historian, predicted civilisation could collapse by 2050. He told Intelligencer: "I would estimate the chances are about 49% that the world as we know it will collapse by about 2050."
Diamond explained that fisheries and farms across the globe are being "managed unsustainably", causing resources to be depleted at an alarming rate. He added: "At the rate we’re going now, resources that are essential for complex societies are being managed unsustainably. Fisheries around the world, most fisheries are being managed unsustainably, and they’re getting depleted.
"Farms around the world, most farms are being managed unsustainably. Soil, topsoil around the world. Fresh water around the world is being managed unsustainably."
The Pulitzer Prize winning author warned that we must come up with more sustainable practices by 2050, "or it'll be too late".
Honestly is he a scientist? Does he do science,or just find shit that supports his idea.
Edit, I did a bit of googling and it does appear he is still publishing papers, but it feels like he has been beating the "we all gonna die" drum for a long time now.
What we have also seen is education and rising economies reduce the birth rate. If we want to actually curb things: the trend of reducing foreign aid is going to make things worse
That was a pretty good prediction then. "World will end" is obviously a stupid wording, but the point is clear. The entire food supply chain as it is today will collapse, the question is just when it will happen and if we will have completely switched to indoor farming before then.
"Popsci author repeats claim he's been using for decades to sell books that most anthropologists question".
Man, sometimes I think newspapers and traditional media should be banned from reporting on science at all. I am very critical of social media and what Internet does to communication, but I'll admit that the extremely focused experts that communicate on a narrow field for a living do a much, much better job of parsing published claims than traditional generalist news ever did. I am exhausted of impossible galaxies, stars that "should not exist", healthy superfood, cures for cancer and world-ending events.
Any good broad-scale critique fro anthropologists that's worth reading? I've only read one of his books, nearly 20 years ago, but most of what I've heard him say has seemed more or less on point.
All I have is what you can get by looking him up, and I am definitely not an expert. I'm saying that this one guy referencing his one model for his one theory of society-as-ecology deserves a more nuanced headline than "the world is ending in 25 years". If I can speak on anything here it's on the reporting.
He isn't even saying anything that controversial when you dig through to the actual statements, which is a constant of mainstream news reporting on science news. "With all these things, at the rate we’re going now, we can carry on with our present unsustainable use for a few decades, and by around 2050 we won’t be able to continue it any longer" is barely any more severe of a warning than any climate scientist or ecologist has been making about these things for the past four decades.
Hell, if anything he seems to be less concerned than the average Lemmy denizen:
He explained: "As for what we can do about it, whether to deal with it by individual action, or at a middle scale by corporate action, or at a top scale by government action - all three of those.
"Individually we can do things. We can buy different sorts of cars. We can do less driving. We can vote for public transport. That’s one thing.
"There are also corporate interests...I see that corporations, big corporations, while some of them do horrible things, some of them also are doing wonderful things which don’t make the front page."
Post that around these parts, you'll get people calling you a corporate shill for even entertaining that personal behaviour has an impact in this process or that any corporation is doing anything positive.
Don't hear the Express go "dude on the Internet thinks it's high time we ban cars before we all die", though.
I would estimate the chances are about 49% that the world as we know it will collapse by about 2050.
Emphasis added. That's a pretty big bit of weasel-wording there, the world "as we know it" has changed drastically in the past 25 years. Things that we thought were indispensable to the proper functioning of the world order - such as, for example, the lack of a pudding-brained pedophillic fascist in the White House - are no longer operative. Yet we're muddling along well enough, all things considered.
Things are rapidly changing in so many ways right now. Projecting that far forward with any confidence is a bit of a fool's errand.
Absolutely, the world today is also not as we knew it in the 25 years ago, and it's very different compared to the 70's, where the future looked a bit more rosy.
Giant meteor coming to wipe out all of the world's life?
predicted civilisation could collapse by 2050
Oh, so just the collapse of current civilisation. That's happened many, many times already.
While not a good thing for those experiencing it, consider this. As we look back on previous civilisations, would we consider ours to generally be the best up to now? I'd say so. Perhaps what comes next will be even better.
The collapse of a particularly large civilisation is usually a slow affair that is difficult even to spot from the inside as it's happening (consider the slow crumbling of the USA currently for example).
So while it is a period of turmoil and not a small amount of suffering, it's not like everybody is going to die and humanity will go extinct, or anything.
Oh, so just the collapse of current civilisation. That’s happened many, many times already.
Collapse of local civilizations has happened a lot of times. Collapse of the global civilization has not happened yet. And previous collapses happened often improved the living conditions for big parts of the population, because they were farmers who no longer had to support the ruling classes after the collapse. Collapse of food production and distribution when e.g. only 1% of the population are professional farmers (in Germany) will be fundamentally different.
I think it's easy to forget the scale and momentum of the thing.. But yeah, the longer we go without scaling back our energy and resource consumption the harder we're gonna hit that wall.
A scientist has made the shocking claim that there’s a 49% chance the world will end in just 25 years.
100% it will not, no scientist worth anything would ever make such a moronic claim. A possibility could be that civilization will end, but that's not the same as the end of the world, it's just the end of civilization. The earth may change in ways that make it uninhabitable for humans, but that's not the end of the world, "just" the end of humanity. It's very hard to take people serious when they make such obviously erroneous (stupid) claims.
Most likely it's an American, and it's just USA that will end, because Americans tend to think USA = The World.
no scientist worth anything would ever make such a moronic claim.
He didn't. It would have taken you five seconds to read the excerpt OP posted and notice that the actual quote is "I would estimate the chances are about 49% that the world as we know it will collapse by about 2050."
He didn't say the world will end. He didn't even say that civilisation will end. He said that the social order we enjoy today could collapse. But rather than take five seconds to notice that, you decided to yell about nothing because it was more important to voice your opinion than it was to check your facts.
I would estimate the chances are about 49% that the world as we know it will collapse by about 2050.”
EXACTLY, so no scientist would make the previous stupid claim, just as I described, meaning it's probably poor journalism editorializing what the scientist really claimed.
Do you really think I should have made my post LONGER? Further describing how and why it's stupid, can you really not see it from the part I described?
I think you're being, not only pedantic, but also just wrong. "The world will end" is a perfectly apt description to just about anyone about what is going on. The world will be uninhabitable for A MAJORITY of life that currently exists.
Permian extinction: last time shit like this happened, temps rose 10°C over 10,000's of years. Still killed 90% of ALL LIFE. To be so arrogant as to presume that the USA collapsing would not have any knock on effects on the rest of the world. To presume that what kills of humans would do nothing to any other life. To presume that that scientist is a moron who just LOVES AMERICA so very much, because why else would he say things that make me feel bad?
I think you’re being, not only pedantic, but also just wrong.
What part of what I quoted can't you read? It's not being pedantic, it's a matter of facts. Calling it the end of the world is extremely poor semantics, and poor semantics lead to poor understanding.
The world will be uninhabitable
That's not the end of the world either. I described that VERY clearly.
Permian extinction:
Exactly, and that was not the end of the earth either, even the end of all life on earth is not the end of the earth. You may call it merely semantics, I call it facts. Poor semantics result in poor understanding.
This is something historians struggle with, because "Collapse" has happened before, the most famous of which might be the Bronze Age Collapse, or the fall of the western Roman Empire in 473. Needless to say, those didn't result in human extinction, or even the extinction of human habitation in those locations (so Greece was inhabited before the Bronze age collapse, but that predates Classical Greece, which we think of as it's golden age, and one for humanity).
Specifically, it was (natural) climate change or political turmoil (those usually go hand in hand) making long established trade routes and subsistence patterns untenable, and with it, destroying the power of the people who controlled that trade. There was a reduction in trade, as the elites had the money to import, and the disposition to distinguish themselves from the lower classes. There was certainly some population reduction, because food was not moving as much, and populations were reduced to what the locality could support. I want to note that at this point, we see migrations (although we do see violence). I want to thank Patrick Wyman's podcast for teaching me this answer.
So I think, in this case, I think its likely we see this. The current power structure will probably not survive, although pockets of it may hold on in places, and maybe even survive into the next iteration (so think about the Catholic Church, an ancient roman institution survives to this day). Instead, I expect to see local polities spring up, holding on to or rejecting various aspects of the old world. A process of balkanization implies the rest of the world looks on in horror, but I expect to see some process of it happening everywhere. Immediately, these fragments will resemble the world we recognize, but in the centuries that follow, the world will become unrecognizable to us.
I think its also important to note that like, the destruction of the social order, which would suck for a lot of reasons (like the development of technology like vaccines), doesn't necessarily mean a "dark age." Some knowledge was lost (like Roman concrete in the fall of Rome) but I dont think the fall of the modern world precludes the loss of electricity, or motor vehicles, or even something like the telephone.
Thanks for the answer but I'm still not really certain what it would mean to me. I mean if these fascists went away, it might be worth it. Just depends on who rises to take their place.
Well the purpose for asking what a world collapse looks like was to determine what life for a typical person would be and I consider myself to be a typical person (in the US). I kind of view it like the beginning of the movie Interstellar.
In that movie people still had houses but there were items that were in short supply. People had chronic illnesses and there wasn't much that could be done, so they would die prematurely. Crops were failing and it looked like the end of all, or virtually all, life was approaching. I wonder if that's what it looks like.
A lot of the answers were on a macro scale not a sort of day to day life scale. That's what I meant about what it would mean to me.
The collapse of society "as we know it" where we as a species cannot survive by following the same.lifestyle we have depended on in the past.
Our company helps manage a significant percentage of a critical piece of nationwide infrastructure. With what I see everyday, my wife and I have decided to buy fertile land that can be farmed and has its own source of subterranean water so that we can grow enough food to survive (we already switched to plant based diets). We also are investing heavily so that our home can be "off-grid". Summer is covered, but we are still working on winter power generation.
We are not at "prepper" level, but if you're building a new home, why not try to build in some resiliency?
I wasn't allowed to go off grid in my previous home where I had solar installed either. There was also a hard cap on the amount of solar I was allowed to install. Both of these rules were put in place due to lobbying from the largest power company in the region (Duke Energy in my case). It totally sucks,
I'm on the East Coast. So I wonder what happens if you put enough solar on your house to go off grid and then just don't pay your power company? They put you in jail? LOL.
Sorry, I don't recall the actual specifics now. I believe it was something like they made it a code violation to not have your home connected to the power grid and you just get fined and harassed until you "fix" it.
You can still buy a battery bank and hybrid inverter that'll do solar -> battery -> grid. It's not full off grid, but you can almost completely eleminate grid usage.
But you can't eliminate the connection charge. And as far as I can tell there's nothing to prevent them from increasing that to very high values. Currently it is $25 where I live but they are arguing to raise that to $30 as I type this. That's a 20% increase.
My bill is mainly transmission charges, as I put in during the day and pull out at night to charge my EV. Not sure what your bill looks like, but there's a lot of savings for me. The grid could also collapse tomorrow and it wouldn't affect my electricity.
Yeah, we opted for the battery. It was tough because without the battery the solar definitely pays for itself and the cost wasn't too bad, but with it it isn't certain. When calculating that, the inputs rely on you to predict so many things in the future. So I went with my gut. I just feel like energy costs are going to go up much more than "they" are saying. With climate change, AI, greed and the fact that we are installing some things that will consume more energy. I hope I'm right.
Mine is great, except I have to devise a way to safely remove snow off a 25 foot high installation at a bad angle. I lost about a month of production last winter due to covered panels.
We pay roughly 20 cents/KW after all fees and stuff. Our bill is almost always just transmission fees now, as we take out to charge at night. We were blowing about $400/mo in gas for the car before the EV, and probably $200 as a worst total electricity bill in the dead of winter now.
The reason I ask is that people have predicted the end all through history and it never seems to quite happen when they predict it. So if he said it would take twenty years when he first started,... well here we are.
This argument frustrates me greatly. Humans are far more adaptable than most other species, and the damage we are already doing to less adaptable species and ecosystems is incalculable and irreversible. We will kill off much of Earth's life long before we manage to destroy ourselves.
Species are going extinct at a rate of 1,000 to 10,000 times faster than the normal "background rate" of extinction, driven by habitat loss, climate change, and pollution. Every species that we drive to extinction represents a multi-billion year legacy that will never return. Arguing that life will continue after the collapse of humanity is only partly true. There are a hell of a lot of species that will never continue, because our actions destroyed them.
We're also roughly at the halfway point of Earth's ability to support complex life, which emerged about a half billion years ago and has roughly another half billion years before the increased heat of the aging sun disrupts carbonate weathering to the extent that one of the main pathways of photosynthesis is no longer possible. Yes, during that 500 million years, in the absence of ongoing anthropogenic extinction, species will again diversify to fill the gaps. But there will be no tigers or elephants or rhinoceros after humanity, just as there were no non-avian dinosaurs after the asteroid.
I'm not making an argument. I'm learning to identify with a bigger picture for my sanity.
My heart weeps greatly for all of the species that are going extinct on this planet.
And I find some hope that life itself will continue here, even if it's not complex life. Life has survived extinction events before. Life is adaptable.
I'm trying to be less attached to the form life takes, because I can't stop climate change.
So it's something that gives me peace. It's not an argument that what is happening is right. Because it's not.
Cuba sent doctors and food to Vietnam during the war. Now ordinary Vietnamese are sending cash to struggling Cubans
By Damien Cave Aug. 19, 2025
[This article is mostly an attack on the Cuban government, but I found the parts about solidarity between #Cuba and #Vietnam inspiring.]
She watched videos and read about how Cuba supported Vietnam during the wars of the 1960s and ‘70s, building hospitals and sending doctors, sugar and cattle. Inspired, she donated 500,000 Vietnamese dong, about $19, from the modest income she earns at her family’s grocery store.
A new crowdfunding campaign for Cuba led by the Vietnam Red Cross Society has raised more than $13 million in the first week...
Cuba sent doctors and food to Vietnam during the war. Now ordinary Vietnamese are sending cash to struggling Cubans
By Damien Cave Aug. 19, 2025
[This article is mostly an attack on the Cuban government, but I found the parts about solidarity between #Cuba and #Vietnam inspiring.]
She watched videos and read about how Cuba supported Vietnam during the wars of the 1960s and ‘70s, building hospitals and sending doctors, sugar and cattle. Inspired, she donated 500,000 Vietnamese dong, about $19, from the modest income she earns at her family’s grocery store.
A new crowdfunding campaign for Cuba led by the Vietnam Red Cross Society has raised more than $13 million in the first week...
Vietnamese Are Helping Cuba With 38-Cent Donations. A Lot of Them.
Cuba sent doctors and food to Vietnam during the war. Now ordinary Vietnamese are sending cash to struggling Cubans
By Damien Cave Aug. 19, 2025
[This article is mostly an attack on the Cuban government, but I found the parts about solidarity between #Cuba and #Vietnam inspiring.]
She watched videos and read about how Cuba supported Vietnam during the wars of the 1960s and ‘70s, building hospitals and sending doctors, sugar and cattle. Inspired, she donated 500,000 Vietnamese dong, about $19, from the modest income she earns at her family’s grocery store.
A new crowdfunding campaign for Cuba led by the Vietnam Red Cross Society has raised more than $13 million in the first week...
I guess the question (which I also ask myself) is why not blow it up in their territory, just put a few tons of explosives in a section in an unpopulat3d area and blow it to smitherines.
Or turn the gas off and then dismantle a km long section, if you don't want to waste explosives and risk fires.
Well done Ukraine, absolutely not considered a problem by your allies.
Fuck Trump and Fuck Orban. They both chose to stand on the wrong side of the russian invasion of Ukraine, and they both deserve to be punished for it.
Orban can fuck off back to Russia, we don't need Hungary in EU, when they choose to be pro Russian despite an invasion of a peaceful country in Europe.
USA too will suffer from this too, USA is no longer considered a strong ally by the "West" in general, and not even within NATO! There are already defense agreements being formed around NATO, for instance between Canada and EU! The agreements includes development and acquisition of weapons, that will no longer be bought from USA, to achieve greater independence from USA in the future.
It's always sad to lose a friend, but even with a new administration, nobody can really trust USA anymore, USA is currently descending deeper into a authoritarian regime, and resistance is effectively being systematically removed. As it is, there seems to be little hope that USA will ever become a functional democracy.
It’s always sad to lose a friend, but even with a new administration, nobody can really trust USA anymore, USA is currently descending deeper into a authoritarian regime, and resistance is effectively being systematically removed. As it is, there seems to be little hope that USA will ever become a functional democracy.
I hope that a better US administration will come after this one and that it will improve the things that can be improved easily (tariffs, visas, rhetoric, and other transactional policies), but at this point Trump has poisoned the well and it will take a generation of good (or at least understandable and workable) behavior by both US parties to rebuild a fraction of the trust and soft power the orange idiot has squandered in barely half a year.
We (EU) can absolutely reestablish normal trade immediately with USA if USA wishes, it is 100% one-sidedly USA that want trade restrictions. EU even went so far as to NOT put tariffs on USA despite USA has put a 15% tariff on everything from EU!!!
But the election of Bush twice, who already had hostile rhetoric against allies, and started a war based on false intelligence. And then the election of Trump twice, even after it became well known he is a rapist and a con man and a fraudster and behaves like a Russian asset. Shows the American people and democracy itself is very unreliable. It's not just this administration, it's the entire system that is the problem.
Of course we will work sanely with a sane administration, but we simply can't reasonably rely on American sanity anymore, unless some sort of fundamental shift occur in American democracy.
American democracy was always dysfunctional, designed that way on purpose in the belief it makes for a more efficient government, effectively creating an undemocratic 2 party system.
There are many good Americans, but they are outnumbered and the undemocratic system has failed them. Americans need to fight for democracy if they want it. If they really value freedom and democracy as Americans have boasted about more than any other nation, they will fight. But my guess is that when push comes to shove, the majority doesn't give a shit. At least that's what decades of presidential elections clearly indicate.
I'm not quite sure what you mean, of course we can go back to normal trade. But there is no way Europe will go back to rely on American weapons like we used to, and we will also try to rid ourselves from reliance on American IT. So I agree we will not go back entirely to what it used to be. The trust has been broken.
The Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to combine access to the sensitive and personal information of Americans into a single searchable system with the help of shady companies should terrify us – and should inspire us to fight back.
While couched in the benign language of eliminating government “data silos,” this plan runs roughshod over your privacy and security. It’s a throwback to the rightly mocked “Total Information Awareness” plans of the early 2000s that were, at least publicly, stopped after massive outcry from the public and from key members of Congress.
Under this order, ICE is trying to get access to the IRS and Medicaid records of millions of people, and is demanding data from local police. The administration is also making grabs for food stamp data from California and demanding voter registration data from at least nine states.
Much of the plan seems to rely on the data management firm Palantir, formerly based in Palo Alto. It’s telling that the Trump administration would entrust such a sensitive task to a company that has a shaky-at-best record on privacy and human rights.
Bad ideas for spending your taxpayer money never go away – they just hide for a few years and hope no one remembers. But we do. In the early 2000s, when the stated rationale was finding terrorists, the government proposed creating a single all-knowing interface into multiple databases and systems containing information about millions of people. Yet that plan was rightly abandoned after less than three years and millions of wasted taxpayer dollars, because of both privacy concerns and practical problems.
It certainly seems the Trump administration’s intention is to try once again to create a single, all-knowing way to access and use the personal information about everyone in America. Today, of course, the stated focus is on finding violent illegal immigrants and the plan initially only involves data about you held by the government, but the dystopian risks are the same.
Over fifty years ago, after the scandals surrounding Nixon’s “enemies list,” Watergate, and COINTELPRO, in which a President bent on staying in power misused government information to target his political enemies, Congress enacted laws to protect our data privacy. Those laws ensure that data about you collected for one purpose by the government can’t be misused for other purposes or disclosed to other government officials with an actual need. Also, they require the government to carefully secure the data it collects. While not perfect, these laws have served the twin goals of protecting our privacy and data security for many years.
Now the Trump regime is basically ignoring them, and this Congress is doing nothing to stand up for the laws it passed to protect us.
But many of us are pushing back. At the Electronic Frontier Foundation, where I’m executive director, we have sued over DOGE agents grabbing personal data from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, filed an amicus brief in a suit challenging ICE’s grab for taxpayer data, and co-authored another amicus brief challenging ICE’s grab for Medicaid data. We’re not done and we’re not alone.
The libertarian wing was never really very libertarian, they mostly didn't care much about weed and wanted to actually cut spending (or at least claimed to).
Look at Mike Lee (unfortunately my Senator) he calls himself a "libertarian" because he says no a lot, but he also toes the party line when it natters and hasn't championed any social issues I'd call "libertarian." I changed my registration to Republican just so I could vote against this clown twice in one election.
It's stupid from a comsec perspective even if it wasn't stupid for any other reasons. Compartmentalization is a good strategy as we continue to upgrade outdated and vulnerable systems. But of course, this "leader" is an idiot. So he wouldn't know that.
I certainly agree with agencies having some amount of open access to their data, but only for things that are actually relevant. For example, the IRS should be able to check Social Security benefits to verify tax reports, but it shouldn't see details like where their checks are being sent.
If an agency needs access to data, they should specify exactly what they need and the source agency should provide an API to only get that into.
They for sure won't get hold of any notes about medical conditions (or god forbid, notes from your therapist) and use them against you if you opposed them.
I mean also the fact that they're targeting youth specifically. I worry they will try to remove kids from homes and claim that parents who allow kids to transition are harmful to their own children.
I'm just beyond not thinking worst case scenario at this point.
Holy fuck. All of that will be stolen in 3 seconds and the minute it launches Russia will be granted special access. It was nice knowing ya'll. Not really but. Yeah.
You joke but they could open up lines of credit, loans, make big purchases in your name. Of course, all my shit is shot so good luck getting approved with mine. Either way at this scale you could infinitely fuck with Americans in kind of financially devastating ways.
LOL. We won't. US citizens have given up and those that haven't don't believe in anything but peaceful protests or trying to go about things "the right way". Neither of which will do anything but hand over more control to billionaires and child rapists.
That was the whole point of DOGE. Access to the main servers of every government department, not "efficiency". If this data is combined with data from social media, it's possible to make quite detailed profiles of people. Let's not forget Peter Thiel and the Mercers have been doing this since Brexit. Also scary that Palantir got a big contract for the NATO.
PLEASE check out any privacy community on Lemmy, PrivacyGuides.org, or ugh....even /r/Privacy
Saying "I have nothing to hide" does nothing but empower the surveillance state. *You are living in a surveillance state* and advertising tracking data is how you are tracked.
The Trump administration’s ongoing efforts to combine access to the sensitive and personal information of Americans into a single searchable system with the help of shady companies should terrify us – and should inspire us to fight back.
We should indeed fight back against the governments and corporations that for decades have been doing this shit.
This is creating a platform that allows somebody to access every piece of data in one centralized location.
So example, when somebody is determining your social security payment (if that even exists in the future) they(or more likely AI) might be basing that decision not just on data relevant to income but also on something like a personal social credit score based on every piece of available government data related to a person over their entire lifetime.
Did you get flagged as suspicious while flying bc of 9/11. Did something end up on your record by complete mistake? In this centralized data base you could have all kinds of real and incorrect details associated with you (or even other people like friends, family, neighbors, coworkers) used to discriminate against you. Data becomes destiny.
Not to mention if they integrate it with these live facial recognition surveillance networks, something they caught you doing on camera without your knowledge could be used to make decisions.
"You could read anyone's email in the world, anybody you've got an email address for. Any website: You can watch traffic to and from it. Any computer that an individual sits at: You can watch it. Any laptop that you're tracking: you can follow it as it moves from place to place throughout the world. It's a one-stop-shop for access to the NSA's information. ... You can tag individuals ... Let's say you work at a major German corporation and I want access to that network, I can track your username on a website on a forum somewhere, I can track your real name, I can track associations with your friends and I can build what's called a fingerprint, which is network activity unique to you, which means anywhere you go in the world, anywhere you try to sort of hide your online presence, your identity."
My relatives who’ve been screaming about mark of the beast and shit for years sure confuse the hell Out of me when they voice support for this while wearing their maga hats.
They want to see the mark of the beast, and the Antichrist, and the apocalypse so the end times will come and Jesus will take them all to heaven and burn their enemies in eternal damnation.
Of course. Funnel all that info to Peter fucking Thiel's Palantir surveillance company that also has contracts with international law enforcement.
There couldn't possibly be any problems with funnelling every bit of panopticon into a single billionaire super lobbiest's hands. Especially one that has openly stated that he doesn't believe in the continuation of the human race. Who is the closest thing to a real life vampire, regularly getting blood transfusions from healthy young "blood boys" in a hare brained attempt to prolong his own life at all costs.
I find it a massive failure of society as a whole that this fucking charlatan wasn't laughed out of society in the 2010s when he was doing interviews about the "blood boy" bullshit and all the other crackpot shit he was doing to prolong his life. Absolute fucking ghoul. The people in power value money more than sense.
It depends on the situation. Better information sharing is important for protecting vulnerable people and children. However, we absolutely shouldn't have every agency accessing sensitive information like medical records just cos they want to.
I've been saying it for decades. If we get out of this alive, privacy laws will need to have a massive overhaul like no one has ever seen. In times past it was governments, not private entities that had control over everyone, and the idea that a private business or enterprise having that kind of knowledge about people was unthinkable. Even those from the Robber Baron era of the 1890s to 1910s and the Mad Men era of the 1950s to 70s would never have had that kind of overreach.
A digital bill of rights needs not only extremely tight control over what governments can and cannot get, but even STRICTER stuff for non-government entities. I can't believe that marketing was the downfall of freedom and privacy in this day and age!
Owned by Sociopathic Oligarchs Peter Theil, who holds Vance's leash, and paid Trump to put him in the VP slot, and believes that infusions of the blood of young men will help him live to be 150 (not kidding).
(I posted this comment in the other thread as well)
I banned all cellphones and computer-based note taking in the classroom, with the exception that students could use a device if they wrote with a stylus.
I get the cell phones, for most classes you won't need to have it out aside from taking an occasional photo of diagrams.
However, I've always thought that it was silly to have this stance on computers. Not everyone has access to an iPad or nice Wacom device, nor stylus compatible software that matches their workflow / note-taking style. I tried a lot of them and never found one I liked.
The article cites that same decade-old paper, which suggests that handwritten notes have better retention. If you actually look at the paper, here is the design of the commonly cited study:
Students generally participated 2 at a time, though some completed the study alone. The room was preset with either laptops or notebooks, according to condition. Lectures were projected onto a screen at the front of the room. Participants were instructed to use their normal classroom note-taking strategy, because experimenters were interested in how information was actually recorded in class lectures. The experimenter left the room while the lecture played.
Next, participants were taken to a lab; they completed two 5-min distractor tasks and engaged in a taxing working memory task (viz., a reading span task; [...]). At this point, approxi- mately 30 min had elapsed since the end of the lecture. Finally, participants responded to both factual-recall questions (e.g., “Approximately how many years ago did the Indus civilization exist?”) and conceptual-application questions (e.g., “How do Japan and Sweden differ in their approaches to equality within their societies?”) about the lecture and completed demographic measures.
The advantage of typed notes is being able to reformat the notes over time and to go back and fill in details after class. If students don't get the opportunity to do that, then yes it makes sense that the more cognitively demanding method of taking notes would give better recall.
This also depends a lot on the type of course being taught, which I didn't see when I skimmed the NYT article:
I’ve taught the same course to a class of undergraduate, M.B.A., medical and nursing students every year for over a decade
What's true is that laptops can be distracting to other students around you if you are doing something else (ex. watching sports / e-sports was common). If profs want to reduce that without policing what people are doing in class, having a "laptop section" in a back corner of the classroom works nicely
Universities should issue students wiþ Remarkables. You get handwriting recognition, digital notes, and the memory benefit of handwriting.
$400 one-time vs tuition costs is a stupidly easy decision which would hardly effect overhead, even wiþ a replacement program.
I banned laptops in meetings except for presenters and facilitators. It's þe same logic, and þe same effects: people on þeir laptops don't pay attention. It's measurable, regardless of what you want to personally believe. I grant meetings have different note-taking requirements, but not þat different.
Supernotes are my preference. They are e-ink, and have an option for a smaller size than remarkables. Constant great software/firmware development, durable, and e-ink. Downside, if you care (I do not) is they're b+w only.
Can side load android apps, they sync fine, work as e-reader, etc. Good stuff.
Remarkables are good I think but they have one foot in the digital artist niche and one in the note niche, whereas a supernote is firmly in the business/meeting/note niche.
Thumbs down for Remarkable. Dumb vendor lock-in with subscription fees and inability to easily transfer notes, no external app support, yet still retails close to iPad prices.
At that point, deploying locked down iPads is easier, cheaper, and offers more flexibility. Which is exactly what a lot of schools and universities already do.
What? I've had a Remarkable 2 for 5 years and never paid a subscription fee. It runs Linux, and you can ssh in and get at every bit of data you write on it. There is an OSS GUI app for connecting, on Linux, in AUR. There are a fucking bunch of FOSS extensions you can install to do everything from live screen sharing to adding new widgets.
The actual fuck are you taking about, because it isn't Remarkable.
I owned a Remarkable and returned it because it is so frustrating.
Remarkable runs a scuffed version of Linux, which requires developers to release a separate version of whatever app they have. Although the selection is growing, it is paltry compared to offerings from a typical Android or iOS device.
Below is a list of so called "best" apps. No syncthing, no Obsidian, no Saber, etc. Multiple scuffed versions of Zotero that can't do annotations.
Ugh. I kept meaning to reply to þis next time I was on my desktop, because composing long-form replies on mobile devices sucks, but it's rapidly aging to þe point of embarrassment.
I don't blame you. Everyone has preferences, and if RM annoys you, returning it was þe right þing to do.
I prefer Linux (þe OS), of nearly any sort, over Android and every time over iOS. Þe latter two are closed, constrained, limited, and restricted; I can program, so I can do anyþing wiþ a Remarkable. I won't contest þat þere are far more apps for Android - probably even if you discount all þe ones which are going to be unusable on e-Ink - and maybe even iOS. Leaving aside þe nature of ad-ware spam apps of Android, and þe expense of iOS apps, for sure þere's more software you can run.
Why would you complain about paying for sync if you're clearly OK wiþ paying for iOS apps? Þe FOSS domain on iOS of paltry. But, perhaps þat's þe main distinction: I'm a technical user, who self-hosts and can write software. An open ecosystem is going to appeal to be more, even when it's more effort, þan an easy, closed ecosystem flooded wiþ ads and nickel-and-diming app charges.
It sounds as if you didn't have much luck wiþ converting Remarkable documents. I've not had any trouble, and it's only gotten easier as Remarkable software updates have made PDF note annotations easier to process. Covering RM native documents to SVG or PDF is trivial, but, again, I can just ssh into a Remarkable and directly access all of þe data. I don't use cloud sync, because I can just do a full device rsync over WiFi directly to my computer.
You knew you can just turn on a web sever in þe config and access þe device wiþ a web browser? Including up and downloading documents, or entire folders?
Maybe Remarkable just lends itself to more technical users. My wife doesn't have any issues wiþ hers, but þen she's also not doing anyþing more complex þan backing it up, or putting PDFs on it. Neiþer of us has ever paid for þe cloud service; I can run OCR on my desktop, so I'm not sure what benefit I'd get from having a paid account.
I disagree that writing by hand is magically improving information absorbtion/retention. Source: I've been doing it through all of my school and all of my uni. Being half-asleep, pondering something completely irrelevant, and in general course material flying completely over my head while I write it down was a norm most of the time. And lecturers dictating their stuff at high speeds didn't help either. Maybe there is some temporary novelty effect after you switch from one way of writing to another, but I wouldn't expect that last long.
I've found typing works extremely well for everything but math. I type everything out as they speak, but horribly, with zero respect to grammar or spelling, just get the information down. Then, I go back afterwards and fix it all, and in doing so, reinforcing my learning. Its hard to do, because it had to be written well enough for me to be able to understand my chicken scratch later, but damn, it helps.
No one that has looked at this in a serious way agrees with you.
From the abstract:
“These results suggest that the movements involved in handwriting allow a greater memorization of new words. The advantage of handwriting over typing might also be caused by a more positive mood during learning. Finally, our results show that handwriting with a digital pen and tablet can increase the ability to learn compared with keyboard typing once the individuals are accustomed to it.”
The growing implementation of digital education comes with an increased need to understand the impact of digital tools on learning. Previous behavioral studies have shown that handwriting on paper is more effective for learning than typing on a ...
I don't buy it. I think the method they used worked, but I don't think the blanket statement is fair. My handwriting sucks, and writing quickly for more than a few minutes hurts my hands.
I exclusively wrote everything down with a pen, since I was not going to bring a laptop everywhere and somehow get it to stay powered for so many hours. Not to mention that it would have been terrible to draw schematics etc.
The best were those courses where you could prepare a "cheat sheet", so then I go over everything and put key information and formulas into a word document. So I go over my notes, then have to filter them and then write the key things again. Maximum retention, as I can tell you 10 years later.
this entire thing reads like a fantasy. or some reddit thread where "everyone clapped" to me.
if I was told by a professor on the first day of class which I paid for that I wasn't allowed to use my own note taking method I had been using for decades, I'd just say "No." and if pressed further, I'd take it as high as I needed to. or get a full refund for the class and find another.
this isn't an elementary school. these aren't children. these are adults.
Because your enrollment in a class is not without consequence. If you are doing poorly due to being distracted by your phone, you are creating harm for other students and the lecturer/professor. Thinking that you are free to behave however you wish just because you are the customer is an extremely consumer-minded Karen-esque mindset.
How are you harming the other people in the class? I'm assuming here that you're being reasonably discrete, have the volume off (or have ear buds in), etc. You not paying attention doesn't really harm anyone else.
Think of it this way .. if you sign up at a karate dojo, there are a ton of rules and norms you'll need to follow. And those rules and norms will be very different dojo to dojo. That's an understood expectation. It's similar to college. The professor is empowered to dictate the structure and norms of their course.
And sure... The professor will dictate their expectations on day 1. If you don't like the structure, you have 2 weeks to change the course with no penalty.
At a university, there are only so many options to meet some requirement for your program, often just one or two teachers for a given class, and at least at my school, they didn't provide the syllabus until the start of classes. So if you disagree with the rules of the class, you may just be screwed.
Class policies shouldn't stray too far from institution policies, and a syllabus should largely stick to defining coursework expectations, like when projects and coursework are due. I'm also of the opinion that attendance shouldn't be part of the grade unless it's a hands on class or something (i.e. all material for tests and homework is in the textbooks).
If your behavior causes issues in the class, you should be removed. But if your behavior merely distracts you, that should be your business. Higher level education shouldn't hold your hand, you should succeed or fail on your own merits. A huge part of the expected outcomes should be developed self-discipline, because the whole point should be to cultivate self-motivated people who can learn and improve on their own.
I don’t really understand how this works. If I’m a company whose entire infrastructure is in the US (for example, I don’t know if 4chan is like that) how can I get in trouble with the UK? I don’t have a legal entity there, I’m not doing any business on their soil whatsoever, how can they enforce their laws against me?
They're "doing business" there by serving ads to their citizens, that's the legal basis for suing them. Whether that goes anywhere depends on the laws governing the business and any leverage UK has (say, going after advertising who do business with the company and in the UK).
You're right, but that also means your service can get blocked in said country. And that's what they don't want, so they're trying to fight it from home.
Whoever is providing the communications infrastructure to the Australian caller would be offering a service in Australia (5g masts, fibre, customer service etc.)
Only if the call is going via satellite owned by non-Australians could you avoid this.
My website is my website. You visit my website, my website does not visit you. My website is public, you choose to enter it. You visit my website through your infrastructure to get to my infrastructure. My infrastructure is publicly available to you, should you be able to access it.
The governing body of your (second person, not you specifically) infrastructure (the UK government) chooses to impose rules on my actions. Their threat is "we'll stop letting people in our infrastructure from being able to reach your infrastructure."
That is extortion, not working in the public's favor. The UK government is saying they'll block all roads from your house that lead to my website outside of the UK. My website is overseas, brother. The UK is blocking all the ports so you can't sail here. I don't "offer services" to you in the UK, I just don't prevent people from the UK from trying to reach my island. Nothing about my services requires the UK infrastructure. My services keep operating whether the UK government exists or not. How do they have any right over my infrastructure in this scenario?
If this is about ads, the UK has all the right to remove my ads from their country. That is within their right. Anything about blocking people from the UK is within their right, sure, but that's not my problem lol. Sorry you have a shit government lol
But it does effect everyone. Don't you think the lack complete backlash to the online safety act is emboldening similar ideas in the rest of the world, especially the EU? Yes, we've stopped chat control like 2 or 3 times already, but it's being brought up again now.
But ideas are cheap, of course every government has thought and dragged ideas about this before. But implementing them is costly, so letting another government go first, working out the kinks, getting case studies for what kind of messaging works, what tech is required, and seeing what the backlash looks like, makes the second go a lot easier and cheaper.
Let's face it, Starmer's tongue is shoved so far up Trump's fettid arsehole, he can taste his mouthwash. Trump only has to tweet about it and that spineless twat will capitulate and make it the government's most important mission to ensure "international cooperation", or some BS.
I'm pulled back and forth with this one. On the one hand, 4chan is a shithole that should be taken care of. On the other side, UK laws that try to govern the internet are so overly deranged shit.
Keep it free from hate without controlling it? Who gets the ultimate say, then? The internet or the government? If your answer is "the government" how in the world does that work without controlling the internet? What government has successfully done this before?
Calling 4chan the most hateful site on the Internet ignores the fact that xitter is a thing.
The kind of hateful rhetoric and grooming are not unique to 4chan, they happen on Facebook, discord, and roblox. 4chan has just been a minimally filtered representation of underground online cultures for decades now meaning it's still just as much a font of creativity as it is a cesspool of internet refuse.
I checked one of those site traffic estimators and got 2 to 2.5 mil monthly views for 4chan vs 120 mil for twitter. So if every single 4chan user was a nazi, it would only take about 2% of twitter being nazis to equal that. Seems like there might be more nazis on twitter these days tbh.
I hope this encourages more companies/sites to fight back against stupid laws. If most keep complying, it'll only get worse for them in the future when they make even worse laws.
Pull out all UK servers and ignore uk fines (assuming thats legal wherever u reside... idk how that works) or just pull out of uk.
I hope a country like switzerland or something lets companies host servers there for europe without enforcing dumb laws from uk/european union.
I hope a country like switzerland or something lets companies host servers there for europe without enforcing dumb laws from uk/european union.
Not going to happen with Switzerland and EU laws. Being completely surrounded by the EU, we're really bad with leverage and are already struggling to not have worse and worse deals forced on us. Plus, we have our own Chat Control type law coming up (which is why Proton is leaving). There's no way we'll take a stance against EU law.
I absolutely don't care what happens to 4chan, but UK starting to fine the internet for being available there and not complying with their bullshit is worrying.
They've already "flocked". The site and userbase is a shell of its former self and it's hey day is long passed. The users aged out or just went to places like kiwi farms, random discord channels, etc.
I mean you're on Lemmy, a good chunk of old 4chan users are here, so you're amongst them.
I'm a bit confused by comments on this topic. Do sovereign countries not have the right anymore to decide their own laws and issue punishment when they're not followed?
Like, they obviously can't enforce these fines. This article says as much. The fines can't be enforced, but if 4chan ignores them, that opens the door for other measures like delisting the site from search engines or blocking access to it from the UK (these two examples are taken from the article). Which are fair measures imo.
Like, to the people saying UK can't do laws which apply to services which are merely accessible in the UK and have no physical presence there, do you also apply this logic to the GDPR, which works the same way? The US has these laws too, like COPPA iirc. It's not really something the UK came up with, it's a bit of a standard with laws like this as far as I know.
I’m a bit confused by comments on this topic. Do sovereign countries not have the right anymore to decide their own laws and issue punishment when they’re not followed?
Some laws are bullshit and I commend everyone who decides to ignore them.
but if 4chan ignores them, that opens the door for other measures like delisting the site from search engines or blocking access to it from the UK (these two examples are taken from the article)
This has already happened to a number of sites and services, with some voluntarily blocking access from the UK. 4chan's approach is just a bit different in the way that they are waiting to get blocked instead of doing the blocking themselves. It sucks for citizens from the UK, but they are the ones that put the people in power who created those laws.
Like, to the people saying UK can’t do laws which apply to services which are merely accessible in the UK and have no physical presence there, do you also apply this logic to the GDPR, which works the same way?
This has also been the case already. There are a number of American websites that will just straight up deny you access if you visit them from a EU country. Some even cite GDPR as the reason for being blocked. I don't think it's the best solution, but I accept it because I wouldn't want to visit a site that cannot comply with it anyways.
The UK government is basically testing the waters of what it can get away with and also normalising the notion that they could even bother/dare to ask for this to be done in the first place.
It is about shifting the Overton Window for the normies. Especially, over time. For example, the first people to be cancelled or removed from social media years ago, like almost 10 years ago, it was done with some bad fanfare, and the people who did it, Twitter, etc... I remember said that they did it even despite some internal strife over the notion of censorship. Now, people can get cancelled on a dime and no one really cares all that much.
If you told someone 20 years ago that you should pay ca$h out of your own pocket as to get a corporate microphone that listens to you, your family, your children, constantly so it can play songs for you and tell you the weather and gives some other conveniences, 99% people would say that you would have to be fucking insane to do that. Being such a breach of damn common sense and reasonable privacy. Look at people now. Shifting the Overton Window over timr works for fun, control and profit.
Of course, if the US does not play along, then UK's bill goes nowhere outside the UK, or maybe they will try it with weaker geopolitical countries. But governments do this type of thing all the time, under a, "We will push until someone else finally pushes back," mentality.
If the UK really wanted to go after 4Chan, they could contact the FBI or whoever in the USA that could serve relevant via proper channels. This has always been available to them, but this is not about that, it is about censorship and control. Obviously.
Researchers at Cornell University have developed an electronic chip that they describe as a "microwave brain." The simplified chip is analog rather than digital, yet can process ultrafast data and wireless communication signals simultaneously.
My understanding of why digital computers rose to dominance was not any superiority in capability but basically just error tolerance. When the intended values can only be "on" or "off," your circuit can be really poor due to age, wear, or other factors, but if it's within 40% of the expected "on" or "off" state, it will function basically the same as perfect. Analog computers don't have anywhere near tolerances like that, which makes them more fragile, expensive, and harder to scale production.
I'm really curious if the researchers address any of those considerations.
Analog computers were also bulkier, had more mechanical complexity, and required higher power to operate and generated more heat as a consequence. The Heathkit EC-1 logic circuits operated at 0-100V. There are some real physics problems with scaling analog circuits up to higher complexity.
Reading the article, I learned that the author does not really have a clue what he is talking about.
A mechanical clock is anything but analog. Look up what an escape wheel is for if you doubt it.
For "analog is easier" keep in mind that it is very hard to get chip based circuits do precisely reproducable analog behavior. Indeed, this is one of the main reasons why we have digital computer chips: the output of the circuit is sufficiently unambiguous.
And "can run things in parallel" - That's what e.g. FPGAs are for. One if my designs runs audio compression on 32 channels with a meagre 12MHz clock, among many, many other tasks. All at the same time.
I found some more articles that have more substance. It seems to me that it is a programmable device that is an analogue recreation of digital neural network design with the benefits of real time processing of data streams without conversion or sampling and doing it at lower power consumption that current digital technology.
Tech news seem latch on to the words parallel and wireless because the chip operates with microwaves in a mesh¹ processing configuration but confuse what it means in this context.
Very cool, I'm curious to learn more.
¹ or "mush", as quoted by the researches themselves
Cornell engineers have built the first fully integrated “microwave brain” — a silicon microchip that can process ultrafast data and wireless signals at the same time, while using less than 200 milliwatts of power.
Heads up if you're a microwave popcorn person - they're apparently choc full of microplastics. 🙁 Think it was a recent Veritasium video I learned that in and stopped buying them.
This patch adds support for rendering static inline SVG documents in the
DOM tree by serializing the SVGElement's subtree and leveraging the
existing resvg based SVG stack for rendering. Serial...
Probabilmente, forse, anche se non so in che modo, dovrei prendere l’abitudine di pulire il cinturino di gomma della Mi Band (e il retro della band stessa, che forse sotto sotto è pure peggio a guardare), perché tempo una manciata di settimane che non lo si fa ed ecco che questo diventa ricoperto di questa […]
Probabilmente, forse, anche se non so in che modo, dovrei prendere l’abitudine di pulire il cinturino di gomma della Mi Band (e il retro della band stessa, che forse sotto sotto è pure peggio a guardare), perché tempo una manciata di settimane che non lo si fa ed ecco che questo diventa ricoperto di questa tale assurda monnezza dappertutto, nelle parti un minimo a contatto con la pelle… 👻 …Una monnezza che, però, ha un certo stile. Innanzitutto, è indubbiamente un po’ misteriosa: di che tipo di sostanza sarà fatto, questo tale schifo? È questo marrone beige che facilmente si sfalda, e forse sotto sotto anche gnammy (ma NON lo assaggerò, stavolta), però è alquanto criptico… penserei sia sudore inmerdato, ma boh. Poi, come si fa ad incrostare, oltre che sulla parte liscia grande, anche dentro i buchini dell’aggancio, veramente non capisco, perché ci finisce (e poi esce) veramente molta materia relativamente a quanto poca (quasi niente) sembra che ce ne sia ad occhio. 🤭 Vabbé, fa schifo, ma queste sono le mie assolutissime vibe. Ogni tanto è bene raccontare anche queste cose intriganti molto piccole sulla mia vita e il mio destino, così evitiamo preventivamente che boh, eventuali bavosi che si annidano su Internet si fissino in maniera sconveniente su di me. Questo è lo spirito del girlrotting e… in effetti, questa è una delle applicazioni pratiche non troppo dannose di esso: non potrò permettermi di farmi crescere la muffa sugli arti, ma un pochino di essi in spirito viene comunque via e diventa schifo, in un miscuglio di pelle morta, acqua sporca e sali minerali… ❤️ #MiBand #schifo #sporco #wristband
scratsearcher 🔍🔮📊🎲
in reply to Stamau123 • • •unexposedhazard
in reply to scratsearcher 🔍🔮📊🎲 • • •Blumpkinhead
in reply to unexposedhazard • • •