BoxwoodSeed

There's not only Mt. Everest. You can also take a stroll to your local hill. Or watch footage of someone else doing the climbing.

Good excuse to become a data hoarder, but bad timing giving the pricing situation.

Imagine if there was a lift to the peak of Mt. Everest. That existing alone would undermine the achievement of having reached said peak.

Also, it's very hard to get multiple difficulty settings right. It's much better to have cheats available to make the experience easier and learn to get better at the game through those.

The default state should be adult. Kid devices should have something special on setup that makes them kid devices.

Or even better, don't have anything like that at all anywhere other than in front of the screen. I really don't see how it is a good thing for a six year old to interact with the Internet in any way.

It won't be only facebook in the long run. Once this works for facebook more and more sites will be pressured to use age verification by law. Once that works well enough it will probably come for all sites, even ones that don't really need it. Take a look at the cookie law and how people handled that to see a recent example.

I disagree. The proper thing is to not have this at all in any shape or form.

There's little use protesting free things. But you can run Linux without systemd entirely. Void is a pretty good experience, for example.

I still think it is a better idea to ban children from the Internet altogether, but without enforcement. Then the parents can decide and if things go south, the parents are to blame and not whoever runs a website.

I'm using an addon that just changes my unique fingerprint every ten minutes. Not sure if that helps or not.

Linux is also ready to support age verification through systemd. Luckily, there are still distros without it, like Void Linux. I switched to it recently and now my media PC boots faster than my TV takes to turn on.

I'd be totally fine to solve this problem by banning children from the internet altogether. Not that I'd enforce this or anything. Just so no one other than the parents can be liable when things go wrong.

There's more and more evidence that internet access isn't healthy to have for children anyway.

Uses unholy amounts of CPU making my laptop's fans spin out of control. Editing is very slow, too. Not really a good impression of vim. I'm still going to recommend people to use vimtutor to get used to vim.

> people don't like the idea of being filmed in public,

I don't think that this can be the main issue, given how nobody really cares about security cameras in public spaces or all the cameras modern cars can come with, nevermind dash cams.

It's so weird to me how people don't like these kind of glasses. They are basically a dash cam for your entire life. Seems like a pretty valuable thing to have.

The only thing I object to is the facebook association.

It is indeed an infrastructure problem, but the infrastructure has to come first.

They provided you with one? My bank made me buy my own device. It's an online bank, so I'm not sure if using the app allows for better tracking than simply using their normal website. So far I haven't been forced to use an app, so I guess not.

The existing designs are fine, are they not? Even if they only spent a single Euro on all of this, which I doubt, it would still be a wasted Euro.

There's a small but important difference between surveillance in certain settings (like a prison) and surveillance around the clock. There's also a difference between keeping records forever and not keeping records at all.

The Panopticon was designed in a way that inmates would not know whether they were watched or not and there was no camera to record everything to be reviewed later by AI agents, either. It also wasn't something that caught on.

Personally, I don't mind surveillance in certain public spaces, as long as the public has access to everything that is recorded in real time and whatever archives are kept. If it's a camera in a public space you'd think it would be better if not everyone had access, then it's probably a camera that it would be better no one had access to.

You know how animals in captivity behave differently from animals living in the wild and why this is judged to be a bad thing for the animals? Humans under surveillance also act differently from free humans and it's a bad thing for the same reason.

It is in essence an attack on the human spirit.

It's a waste of resources to make something that exists worse.

You have to consider that people got paid coming up with this nonsense.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

That is before looking at the new designs and how horrible they all are.

Linux phone is already a thing that exists and is at a point where it can be used by tech illiterate people within the confines of what is possible normally.

It's just that few people bother using it. But that number might increase if Android continues it's war against its users.

Currently my bank requires a device where I need to insert my card to get a one time six digit code based on a QR code the banking website serves me that the device scans.

I'm not quite sure why they don't support something like a yubikey with FIDO, but maybe there's a good reason.

I always disable everything Google that comes preinstalled other than maps, including the App store. You can download stuff that you can only get there through Aurora, but really most of what I use comes from F-Droid.

Not that I trust a device running Android enough to do banking, mind you.

I am fine with the "degraded" experience. I eventually gave up because I got served captcha loops instead of the actual site. All I need from an untrusted site is to read text which shouldn't require JavaScript.

EVs are great in, say, Norway. But the population of the country Norway isn't even half that of the city Tokyo. Less people means less cars on the street which translates to less cars using up charging stations.

Once things get crowded and you have to wait in line to get your vehicle charged, it becomes a bit annoying.

There's a lot of rambling in this article.

The way I see it, if you cannot sell it, you do not own it. And if you don't get to own it, there's no reason to buy it.

Been thinking about whether hardware keys could solve this conundrum. Basically a special USB stick that holds all your licenses. You can buy a license in any store you want. You can sell a license wherever you want. As long as you have a license, you get to (re)download your media.

No single platform can hold all your licenses hostage because then all your licenses are with you on your hardware key. You'd need the ability to create backups where the idea kinda falls apart. Maybe something like a blockchain could solve this in a better way.

I find it endearing that someone is keeping up the resistance against JavaScript. Used things like noscript myself since 2008 or so. Eventually gave up since nearly no website would work that way and served you captcha loops instead.

I won't even go there for search results, as new reddit is unusable to me. Too many clicks to get anywhere. It's quite surprising that so many people seem to have no issue with it.

> Citizens must not be forced to identify themselves to access lawful online content or services unless strictly necessary, proportionate and provided by law

Citizens must not be forced to identify themselves. Period.

I do not appreciate the weasel language.