jonathanstrange

It literally prepares the audio for export, though. There is an export setting that allows you to choose the audio codec, channels, encoders, target true peak or LUFS level, and then normalize or "optimize" (built in limiting and compression) the audio to that level. For example, you can choose "Youtube" to optimize your audio automatically for Youtube. It also has a built-in dialogue leveler, for example. It has more audio capabilities built-in than many other video editors, although there are paid ones with the same capabilities.

You can easily do the same in Reaper, of course, but it will require you to export audio, then process externally, and import it again, so it's not the ideal workflow.

Why should alleged "cybercriminals" not be be allowed to register domain names? There are procedures of seizing domain names in various countries, and these are in my opinion already somewhat questionable, but the premise of this article seems to go far beyond that and suggest that what they call "malicious actors" should somehow be deprived of infrastructure because they are suspected criminals. The rationale for that is that they later show up on blocking lists...?

That seems beyond any reasonable due process and legal standards. Or am I missing some international legal standard and judicial oversight that would play a role here? I'm genuinely confused.

If it had VST support I could use it instead of DaVinci Resolve.

Technically speaking, you cannot put lettuce in a Greek salad because it will by definition cease to be a Greek salad once lettuce has been added.

Edit: Wait a moment. You can put lettuce i a Greek salad. It just happens not to be a Greek salad afterwards. A subtle difference.

AFAIK, "America First" is a Russian misinformation campaign designed to weaken the US.

I mean, it's $500M versus $13B.

Right, 2FA. My bank wants me to log in to my phone app and then sends an SMS to the same phone to confirm the app transaction. It's super-secure.

I'm assuming the FBI is investigating in all of those cases and, if there is a further threat, will close down those companies / arrest their management?

Or is this a case of "hey look, our bots are doing illegal things but we're exempt from the law"?

> some quality "literature", of some form

In my opinion, we will continue to need fully educated people who read books and peer-reviewed articles. We need literature, not "'literature', of some form."

I only use web chat with copy&paste and file upload option. Anything else I don't trust, especially since the people who create AI harnesses and apps use AI to develop them.

> It’s also pretty obvious that saying “parent should take responsibility” is also not working. Just observe the world around you to know it’s a non starter.

That's like saying "take a look at owners of fast sport cars, it's obvious this is not working and they have too many accidents." If you want to patronize other parents and think the government should be more responsible and parents less responsible, please state that honestly. Don't make up alleged "facts" to make a point.

Otherwise, I'll just say "it's obvious you're wrong, just observe the world around you and you know age verification is a non starter."

The problem with native apps are the app stores and their requirements. For true cross-platform, you need to develop for 5 platforms (macOS, Windows, Linux, iOS, Android), each with their own technology, favored programming language and ecosystem, deployment, certificates, regulations, requirements, guidelines, arbitrary app review policies, categories, etc. I'm doing that currently and it's madness.

IMHO, it would be best if developers all over the world boycotted proprietary platforms entirely. (Of course, this is never going to happen, I'm just saying.)

Just don't travel to the US.

It annoys me that recently people seem to propagate the wrong use of em dashes. There is no space—an em dash is practically never typeset with spacing. You use an en dash in European typesetting – they have spaces, which your typesetting system hopefully adjusts to sane values. They're not like the spaces between words.

At least, that's how I learned it. Everyone seems to disagree and write em dashes with spaces nowadays.

He could end this illegal war of aggression any day, just like Putin can end his war against Ukraine any day. There is nothing to discuss here.

Gemini Pro has become so bad for my purposes -- copy & paste Go programming and code analysis with the web GUI -- that I'll take any model with equivalent capabilities at the same price or lower. I don't care where it comes from, I'm not dealing with state secrets and, frankly speaking, US corporations have an abysmal track record regarding safety and surveillance.

Question about this from a EU citizen who doesn't know the details of how the EU works (who does?): Are there legal means to challenge this vote based on the procedure that was taking place?

You need a centralized developer program but only for the apps for the secure enclave. The whole point is that they would require special privileges.

The people who are against this do not trust any of them for good reasons, so that ship has sailed long ago, too.

The problem is easy to solve by making 99% of all apps normal apps that don't get any special privileges and don't require any developer certification, and having a certified developer program with heavily locked down run mode for the 1% of high security apps like banking and payment apps. It's not hard to attest unambiguously to the user in some way whether they are running one of these rare secure apps or a normal one, a restricted API suffices but you could also just add an LED for it.

You can't possibly convince me that Google couldn't develop something like that if they wanted to.

Wars are sometimes caused by small acts of violence (e.g. at the border) that are mutually retributed, becoming larger and larger, until the hostilities turn into an all out war. This is sometimes called "escalation of violence." If wars are sometimes caused in that way, then there must be some wars for which a slippery slope argument concerning the escalation of violence is not fallacious.

What Anthropic is doing is illegal in many jurisdictions. I don't know about the legal situation for the Chinese domains they mark, but steganographic data extraction without user consent would definitely be illegal in the EU, for example.

That's not correct. Many slippery slope arguments are perfectly valid and sound, namely whenever there is plausible evidence for the existence of the respective slippery slope. It can for instance be based on historical precedents, or on probabilistic or convincing balance of consideration sub-arguments for the slippery slope premise.

Whether its a fallacy or not depends a lot on how warranted the slippery slope premise is (notwithstanding other, possible logical errors that might me made in setting up the argument, of course).

The world you describe is not plausible from a technical perspective. Any kid who wants to will be able to download a tool that will enable them to surf the net like an adult. It will be as common as our access to cracked C64 games during the 1980s. The only thing to limit this in any reasonable sense is to crack down hard on all operating systems and network software.

At the very least, you will need to make sure that no child can install Linux. Otherwise, why wouldn't they? Most kids aren't stupid and want to know what their braindead parents are doing on the internet.

I really believe it's dangerously naive to believe this is about the children. It's quite obvious why suddenly ominous entities are shilling for age verification, digital IDs, digital wallets, and so on (more is to come). Countries in the EU used to get valuable SIGINT from the US that prevented many serious crimes. They still get it but now they've realized that the US might not always remain aligned with them and panic because they have almost no access to modern operating systems except for buying 0-day exploits on shady black markets. They desperately need to get their foot in the door to get the right surveillance infrastructure going. At the same time, politicians are rightly worried about the influence of bots on elections.

These are the principal reason why governments are suddenly pushing for this. If this was about the children, they'd have done it 30 years earlier. Until very recently, this discussion didn't even exist. It's manufactured.

> Yes, in an ideal world, it would all go down to parenting. Since we live in reality, some of that work is shifting to ensuring defaults are in place.

No, they aren't in place at all. It's the parents' job and vast majority of parents do it fine. Nobody wants the Nanny state you propagate.

Why do parental software / settings and filters not work? Aren't there even approaches based on whitelisting?

First of all, the sane chip card design will not take place. That's virtually guaranteed. As a closely related example, banks all over the world have moved away from this design to merely trust the (nonexistent) security of mobile phones. Why? Costs and convenience.

Second, if you hand over a chip card, you still need to lock down and tightly control every executable on every machine. How else would you guarantee that kids cannot access content the government deems unsuitable for them?

Third, I still haven't seen a coherent argument why parents shouldn't be in charge of what content their children are allowed to consume. I'm not at all against governments providing free parental control software, for example, or voluntary industry standards similar to the movie ratings.

Finally, "protecting the children" is obviously a pretense. The sole purpose of the push for this is for governments to get the foot in the door of operating systems they currently can't control well. It's the starting point for a surveillance infrastructure: age verification -> digital ID verification -> tracking who said what and handing the data over to intelligence and law enforcement.

Kids will simply find a way to circumvent it without any extra steps. To make age verification useful for protecting kids, you'd need to lock down every software on every operating system and put it under tight government control. We're talking about things like every programming language with a networking library, wget, curl, every web browser that was ever developed, etc.

All kinds of tools and software would need to be locked down or criminalized. Otherwise, some smart kid is guaranteed to get around the restriction and give that method to others, and if it's at school on a USB stick.

I was replying specifically to someone who insinuated that all social media (or, at least, all supposedly addictive social media) should be banned for everyone, including adults. To me, it's a matter of personal freedom that they shouldn't be banned for adults.

[citation needed]