it's about the payment processors, not the card type, though the article makes it confusing by mentioning credit cards as it's really not about that at all
Read the FAQ, it's about no longer relying on US payment processors for handling transactions in a different country that may not support your country's payment system
Cute but like a lot of captchas misguided at this stage
The problem they try to solve is real, but I don't think that 'hacking minigames' are the correct direction to be looking to solve this, and ultimately end up making mandatory human identity verification seem more palatable as the less annoying option
games and challenges like this are more annoying / resource consuming to humans (i.e., time, patience), and can imagine it ends up excluding humans who cannot complete the challenge due to extenuating circumstances, like i have no idea if someone who uses sight assistance accessibility tooling can complete this challenge reasonably, and if this style of challenge takes off I am pretty sure the challenges will continue to exclude many humans who use accessibility tools
I worry this approach ends up being the next cookie banners (which were always malicious compliance in the saltiest, pettiest way)
anubis-style cycle burning approaches seem to be best, but have not looked for research on the efficacy of this approach. if it does have a positive impact for operators though, a method like that seems better
edit: to be clear, I do not want mandatory identity verification -- not at all it's awful, and my fear is that tools like this will only serve to make that option seem more palatable in comparison
it's the cornerstone of their strategy to invest in local, sovereign ai models in an attempt to court attention from persons / organizations wary of us tech
it's better to understand the concern over mozilla's announcement the following way i think:
- mozilla knows that their revenue from default search providers is going to dry up because ai is largely replacing manual searching
- mozilla (correctly) identifies that there is a potential market in eu for open, sovereign tech that is not reliant on us tech companies
- mozilla (incorrectly imo) believes that attaching ai to firefox is the answer for long term sustainability for mozilla
with this framing, mozilla has only a few options to get the revenue they're seeking according to their portfolio, and it involves either more search / ai deals with us tech companies (which they claim to want to avoid), or harvesting data and selling it like so many other companies that tossed ai onto software
the concern about us tech stack dominations are valid and probably there is a way to sustain mozilla by chasing this, but breaking the us tech stack dominance doesn't require another browser / ai model, there are plenty already. they need to help unseat stuff like gdocs / office / sharepoint and offer a real alternative for the eu / other interested parties -- simply adding ai is mozilla continuing their history of fad chasing and wondering why they don't make any money, and demonstrates a lack of understanding imo about, well, modern life
my concern over the announcement is that mozilla doesn't seem to have learned anything from their past attempts at chasing fads and likely they will end up in an even worse position
firefox and other mozilla products should be streamlined as much as possible to be the best N possible with these kinds of side projects maintained as first party extensions, not as the new focus of their development, and they should invest the money they're planning to dump into their ai ambitions elsewhere, focusing on a proper open sovereign tech stack that they can then sell to eu like they've identified in their portfolio statement
the announcement though makes it seem like mozilla believes they can just say ai and also get some of the ridiculous ai money, and that does not bode well for firefox as a browser or mozilla's future
I get the intention but it's a bad idea, same with the article
if people are meant to depend on your endpoints, they need to be able to depend on all of them
you will always have ppl who don't respond to deprecation notices, the best you can do is give them reliable information on what to expect -- if they hide the warnings and forget, that's their business
but intentionally making problems without indication that its intentional results in everyone (including your own team) being frustrated and doing more work
you cannot force ppl to update their code and trying to agitate them into doing it only serves to erode confidence in the product, it doesn't make the point ppl think it makes, even if the court of public opinion sides with you
cover your bases and make a good faith effort to notify and then deal with the inevitable commentary, there will always be some who miss the call to update
black markets and opposition members i’ve used / talked with focus on disposability not security
the premise of their communications is always “the platform is bugged” and in case of opposition members “the government can always just beat you and trick you into unlocking your phone”
deals happen on messenger all the time and burning messages / rotating phones and accounts is very common. for opposition members, messaging apps are purely for benign communication and actual discussion happens in person or in truly destructible formats or it’s not recorded at all
periodically anon burner message apps appear on app stores and rotate out pretty fast once they start getting too much attention
the idea of a perfectly secure app for communication is currently mostly a fantasy; if a malicious actor wants to get your info and communication they will. this doesn’t mean give up completely and be insecure but instead just be in a position to ditch the app when it becomes necessary, if you need that level of security
it’s better people be trained to understand the reality of what can be done with the communication methods they use and how they can be punked
so they can make informed decisions — i’m fine with signal’s goals and efforts but i’m not a fan of signal advocates treating security and privacy like another round of the OS wars, that teaches people the wrong lesson and makes it harder to convince ppl privacy and security are a problem we need to take seriously not just for criminals but for everyone. privacy and security benefit us all or it benefits no one
azure likes to open new sections on the same tab / page as opposed to reloading or opening a new page / tab (overlays? modals? I'm lost on graphic terms)
depending on the resource you're accessing, you can get 5+ sections each with their own ui/ux on the same page/tab and it can be confusing to understand where you're at in your resources
if you're having trouble visualizing it, imagine an url where each new level is a different application with its own ui/ux and purpose all on the same webpage
> They also sell so many overpriced kits with not much going on in them (just a few pieces of paper, not enough dice, sub par instructions ). Or really expensive character toys.
For me this is the most telling part that Hasbro doesn't quite get what you're actually selling if you have a tabletop company; it's not the ruleset, that will be leaked as soon as you sell a single copy and people actually play the game. It's instead ideas and world building visions from the people who were directly involved in creating the world and rules the company tries to sell to people. People are creative, but even the best story tellers wouldn't turn their nose up at some lore to help spark creativity, long as the lore isn't needlessly restrictive.
It's endemic for sure -- I download pirated stuff yes, but as I got older, I really did try to make an effort to use streaming services, movie/media stores, app stores, etc. Everything about it was so awful and ridiculous that it just wasn't worth my time to deal with the frustrations and more importantly the ever increasing costs and advertisement non-sense. Having an entire TV series I was watching suddenly vanish from the provider library in between episodes, shows/music I had used the applications own "download to local device" feature vanished just because I was traveling and suddenly I was not approved to watch/listen to the stuff I had paid for, constant advertisements and pushes for more subscriptions, it was absolutely asinine.
I do continue to download some pirated items but largely I just checked out of modern media mostly because the cost of participation is too much. At least online there are some services that video essayists release on which aren't too bad (Nebula isn't horrible, but still is a bit annoying).
I'm fearful of the day that searching "[some specific functions I want] + FOSS" and looking for repositories that have what I'm hoping for will stop working, since it's been fairly successful for me to find software that doesn't come with all the modern tech world non-sense. Some of the most simple applications like DaisyDisk for macOS or the Redirector plugins for browsers are absolute gems that have made my life objectively better and more convenient, and the teams behind these programs have shown repeatedly they aren't interested in anything else besides just having their programs work. It was very easy decision to donate to these teams/buy the apps because it was the most simple transaction ever, and the programs work as well or better than they did when I first installed them. Same with games from GOG -- I love that I have bought HoMM3 one time, and I think more than a decade later, I can still use the same installer, get the installer again, and enjoy my game wherever I want, and it's a completed game that can be further improved by mods.
Real and workable models for selling tech exist and it works without DRM -- I know for corporations it's not enough money coming in and they "need" to monetize every last drop of blood out of everything, but it's not like these business models are impossible or even bad; just different and a bit calmer than the corporate non-sense we have today. And the alternative models without DRM and data pilfering are definitely something I am willing to buy into, since there looks to be a pretty damn good chance I'll be able to actually use the stuff I'm buying how I want to.
I think this is an unkind assessment to Kaczynski. What he did was wrong, there isn't denying that, but I think people forget he really was a very good mathematician and that he very likely was a subject in the MK-Ultra experiments without realizing it.
This is not to excuse all his actions as we cannot know really the full extent of the experiment he participated in without a proper understanding of what was going to happen to him and the potential outcomes.
His positions in his manifesto aren't exactly bad positions to take, his actions in bringing attention to it were bad and hurt many innocents.
I think it's possible to condemn his actions while also recognizing his non-violent contributions and the elements in his life that may have contributed to the creation of the Unabomber. After reading about the experiments he attended, it's very hard for me to remove those as a contributor to the Unabomber; they weren't the sole contributor, but I can't imagine having such derision and psychological abuse for 200+ hours without walking out of it maladjusted.
The purpose of such statements I think isn't to excuse Kaczynski's actions, but instead to ensure that we aren't just imagining some video game or movie villain that appeared and the FBI heroically stopped; he was a human being who lived a pretty normal life, and then he changed and became the Unabomber. The latter is extremely sad and appalling given the damage, and I think the latter is made even worse by remembering the former; he used to be a pretty smart guy and contributed well to society.
It's a sad story no matter how you view Kaczynski, but I think that we are worse off if we don't recognize that he was at some point a fairly normal human being, teaching maths and studying maths, who went through a lot of psychological issues, and came out as the Unabomber.
Can you expand on this a bit? Which element regarding censorship does Blockchain help prevent?
I ask earnestly as it feels like a forgone conclusion but depending on what you refer to I'm not sure it is.
My initial thought is about freedom of spending and transactions as a concept of the chain but I guess it's not exactly censorship in the most common sense.
I think if we also look at a proposed legislation unemotionally, it would be understandable that this would not be expected to be done in a single operation, but rather, a concentrated and on-going effort to begin to either decouple the tracking from existing code, or rewrite functionality without the tracking, and that Facebook would be subject to assessments to ensure they are continuing to do so.
I get that likely this very likely means that just burning the whole thing to the ground and starting from scratch for most functionality would be less of a time sink, but the point is more that Facebook actually begin to engage in operations to remove tracking from their infra, not just throw up their hands and say "It'll be too much work!". We can know for sure if it's a new code base that just never had it to begin with, and Facebook was transparent in the migration process.
Regardless, though, I do get that the thrust of your point is that this is not a trivial task.
Many of the apartments aren't designed well for such a set up, or have other strict noise rules, concerns over water problems and maintenance costs, or just simply the landlord doesn't like the idea of the units having the machines as even with more modern washers with good locks/seals, people still manage to misuse them and cause water damage. Or they just don't want to manage the maintenance for such units.
It's also possible that there's an expectation that you always have a washer/dryer combo, whereas having just the washing unit isn't uncommon from what I've seen in the EU/other parts of the world and then just having an air drying rack for drying. I was a little surprised when I first moved abroad at not having a dryer (and annoyed admittedly), but I got used to it pretty easily and just adjusted my laundry schedule. Likewise, the size may be a difference in expectation, as many people expect full sized units installed, not compact units.
While I get what you're saying, this form of blogging is closer to opinion pieces, not journalism; it's why news papers formerly segregated the op-ed pieces from the rest of the paper, as it's less about a journalistic investigation and more a writing opining/pontificating. Blogging can have all sots of forms, some closer to news, some closer to personal diaries/journals. Based on the piece, this is closer to the latter, someone's personal experience made public.
I realize that nowadays it's not as clear cut when you're reading an op-ed and when you're reading a piece of news, and sometimes it seems like authors try to blur the lines, but the distinction exists for a reason. The author of the piece did not really seem to try to make this anything more than "this is my story", which should set the tone and understanding of the writing he's about to present.
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/euro/digital_euro/faqs/html/ecb.fa...
Read the FAQ, it's about no longer relying on US payment processors for handling transactions in a different country that may not support your country's payment system