rocqua

> Are you ok with all devices considering the user hostile and coming with heavy encryption and locked bootloaders?

This might be the least bad option. If it prevents server side enforcement, then settling on government enforcement of the commercial status quo might be less bad.

And what you describe is already the case for almost all devices anyway. The commercial incentives are there. And sadly, from a security PoV it is also quite valuable.

The difference between one and two is being able to link two things I did. If you know who I am, that barely affects me. But if you can then cross-check whether I also went ballroom dancing, or went to a golf course, or went to a sexclub, or went to a ball-game. Then it starts affecting me.

Put it in the parental controls feature of the browser. Parents have to turn it on. Parents get to decide if their kids can watch porn. The government helps parents enforce the rules parents want.

The issue is that currently, adding restrictions to what minors can do is expensive, both economically, and politically. It requires the cooperation of a lot of non-government appointed people, and many of them could (locally) sabotage the restrictions.

This limits the restrictions to those with incredibly broad support. Keeping a lot of agency with families on how to raise their children.

Digital age verification, if implemented well, is easy to enact, and hard to sabotage without being noticed. That enables restrictions that 49% of people disagree with. Heck, it enables restrictions that 49% of Congress disagrees with. That could be 60% of people disagreeing.

Those bans are leaky, and physical. They aren't censorship, and (almost?) Exclusively ban services or sale of goods to underage people. They are also costly to implement, and require a lot of state effort to enforce.

These digital checks, if done "right". Are cheap to implement, and hard to get around. They don't easily let adults allow a kid to do it anyway. And a government can trivially check if a whole swath of businesses is implementating it.

That last point makes it very easy for governments to use this for widespread ideological interventions. With very little option for others to push back, because few people are involved in enforcement.

Zero knowledge proofs are the solution.

The website sends the verification function to the user device. The user device then returns a proof that it knows an input that the verification function accepts.

The verification function should include a digital signature check.

This is generally possible already with SSI based credentials, including standards created by W3C.

Does biochar remain in ground for long? How quickly does it decompose and rot?

Naively, you'd expect the tidal current to be proportional to (tidal range/water depth). Which causes that map to be a lot less informative.

This is a civil matter, is it not? This is the NYT suing OpenAI, which is not a criminal matter.

A type might have a generic parameter T, but e.g. use it as a phantom marker.

Then even if T isn't cloneable, the type might still admit a perfectly fine implementation of clone.

Why does it need to be AI specific? This would be valuable for reviewing human code changes aswell right?

On humans, you can generally see the force they apply by looking at strain.

I came here to (wrongly) say that wooden disks were never used as wheels, and that ot all started with spokes. Some checking showed that, in fact, the oldest known wheels have a lot of solid disks. E.g: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ljubljana_Marshes_Wheel

Hopefully this can disabuse others of similar mistaken memory.

So, the problem was a local voltage oscilation, where the high voltages caused generators to shut off.

How do these oscilations start? I understand that voltage isn't necessarily equal across the network, where frequency is. But that only allows oscillating, it doesn't cause it. Is this a basis inductor capacitor oscillation? Is it the small delay in inverters between measuring voltage and regulating their output? (seems unlikely, given that renewables aren't blamed) or is there some other source of (delayed) feedback.

And why do generators cut off at a high voltage? Is it a signal of 'too much power'? Is it to protect the generator from some sort of damage?

The step back is allowing inspections.

There's a whole escalation you are forgetting. Iran will retaliate, to which the US wilk respond. That yields a situation where neither side can back out, but neither is putting enough pressure in the other to force them to stop.

The way through seems limited to:

- ground invasion - nuclear annihilation - regime change (no guarantee of success)

If the regime change doesn't work, the options are horrible. And remember that the current Iran regime is the result of a US backed regime change, which allowed radical elements to mobilize hatred against the US.

That is a massive oversimplification of the diplomatic failures on many sides here.

You could just as easily say that doing regime change in a country will make them hate you, or that backing out of deals will make things worse, or that Israel can shape US policy at their own whims.

Yes, Iran had a stupid nuclear strategy. But that is only a minor part of this story.

Only a minor difference, but from what I know, those strikes were not against government targets?

Do you think there will be boots on the ground? It seems more likely to me that Trump will escalate only through air attacks, fail to achieve much, and then either end the war by walking away, or throwing nukes.

Quite different from the Iraq war.

It is very likely false that Iran had nuclear weapons, or was within weeks of having them. This was also the position of US intelligence, until they were forced by higher-ups to speak different words.

Of course, Iran very much wanted the ability to make a nuke, and they probably could have had one ready in 1 or 2 years. But the proof put forward in defense of this strike is claiming Iran was weeks away from nukes. That proof is dubious.

(Also interesting to consider how US retreat from the nuclear deal under Trump 1 has affected and shaped the current situation)

An other compatible explanation is that they wanted ambiguity about their weapon production.

Besides, wasn't this whole thing triggered by a UN report showing they had made a lot more 50% enriched stuff than expected? I.e. the monitoring "worked"

My experience on the Caledonian sleeper, in a 'room' was quite cramped in all senses (I am over 6 feet tall), and quite expensive aswell. If that had been optimized better, I would have enjoyed it more.

As far as I know, most real screens decided to have different display based on HDR or SDR input. Mostly because on HDR they are more willing to do very high brightness for a very small part of the screen.

Most displays have the ability to simulate their HDR range on SDR input I believe by dynamically inferring the contrast and seeing if it can punch up small local bright areas.

No, you can do it safely. The idea is to have the password renewal process also ask for the previous password.

This means the password changing method doesn't need to store a plaintext password, but still has access to the old plaintext password when changing. It's still not a great idea, but that's because nagging your users will see them choose worse passwords.

By what authority can they actually use violence to guard these federal workers and buildings? Not the insurection act, and so not at all due to pose comitatus.

What can they do to guard then?

That's great for the non Trump side! If the 'theory of change' is we will protest peacefully, get the authorities to violently surpress us to get wide sympathy and show the wider world how horrible the government is. Then you want a trigger happy authority, so that the disproportionate response is as disproportionate as possible.

Nonviolent protest doesn't need to be respectable. It needs the moral high ground. That means you need to goad the enforcement to use violence against you.

This doesn't just work by getting the public on your side. It works by showing that you are not repressed by fear. Fear is how facists rule, so showing others they don't need to fear, that they can decide not to fear, that is the real threat to authority.

That means they will abuse you to make others fear. When that happens, you need it to trigger outrage as widely as possible.

Isn't it going to take a tipping point to get republicans to impeach Trump, or at least reign him in? And if Trump isn't reigned in, it seems to me the US will backslide into authoritarian (light) facism.

So a tipping point is required. ideally you engineer it to more likely tip the right way. But doing nothing because otherwise it might reinforce the status quo, will guarantee the status quo.

Horribly, this means one of the best possible outcomes is an unprovoked massacre by these Marines, ordered by Trump.

Federal crimes require federal court to establish.

Besides, there are also fully legal immigrants being deported.

What can a soldier do to protect federal property or personel that is not law enforcement? Manual labor to throw up barriers seems to be the only option. Anything else requires violence, which only law enforcement can do legally I thought. Unless perhaps they intend to 'use self defense'. But intent kinda defeats self defense.