headsman771

Nothing makes me dismiss and distrust a person or organization faster than hearing them say "russia/china are funding {controversial_thing}"

Its boogeyman thinking.

Being concerned about the trend of laws in the EU doesn't make someone a bad actor.

I would love a good Linux tablet with long battery life, repairability be damned.

I remember hearing about forest mismanagement long before Trump's presidential runs. It's curious how many people complaining about right wing talking points associate it solely with Trump.

Dutch company Mammoet was awarded a contract in May 2001 and, within three months, designed, fabricated, and deployed over 3,000 tonnes of custom equipment aboard a specially modified barge.

Impressive, particularly by today's standards.

A CO2 sensor isn't going to tell you anything that your own common sense couldn't. Enclosed spaces with many people have higher levels of CO2.

Tracking CO2 levels seems like a pretty boring hobby.

Don't be mistaken, it's the delay I'm complaining about, not how to instal F-Droid or apps through it.

It is not reasonable to advocate for ADB if the 24 hour wait is too long.

I'll copy what I wrote elsewhere. Fraud uses social tactics and legitimate tools in the vast majority of cases. Developer verification will have absolutely no effect on that.

Impinging on my property rights cannot and will not protect or help fraud victims.

And they should remain the outlier.

No, it is not. This is moving the goalposts. The original issue is developer verification. No appreciable harm prevention can or will come from forcing devs to identify themselves.

That's because most fraud uses social tactics and LEGITIMATE tools/software.

Impinging on my property rights cannot and will not protect fraud victims.

Why do you keep harping on about ADB installs. That's not helpful. It doesn't help me install open source apps from FDroid. It's ridiculous that you think booting up a computer and using ADB is a reasonable workaround. It isn't.

Yes. Because it isn't any of those 3. It's not in contravention of any long standing norm (just since the popularization of the internet), law, or long standing precedent.

And because it gives multiple groups extreme power and influence over many things.

And because those groups clearly crave that power and influence.

The internet is the new public sphere and forum, and it should not be possible except through legal judgement to bar or hinder anyone from accessing it.

If necessary, create private gated networks for adult material.

Anyway. You're clearly entrenched for some reason, so I won't waste my good faith effort any more.

No. Not without upending innumerable precedents, laws, and norms in the US, or optionally, bankrupting it.

I take your point, but it's extremely foolish to think that ensured compliance won't be sought when it's technologically feasible.

Its already illegal to show adult material to minors. If they were about enforcing laws properly they'd just do that. For instance a court ruling that adult material isnt allowed on the internet, since you can't effectively ID visitors.

Anyone could just make a fake ID though, so what did they do? Make creating fake IDs a crime. If we can lie about our age to the OS, they'll make it illegal to do that as well.

This is an obvious move to reduce computing freedom.

I admire your optimism.

All I can do is encourage you and others like you to ponder upon:

Google is trying to force all devs to have verified identies

Google and Apple and Microsoft already ban applications they simply don't like (violates their "policies") from their app stores

There will be attempts to close the holes when they come to the attention of "stakeholders"

The UK already wants to ban VPNs

And the aforementioned, you can't really enforce laws or policies like this without locking down the OS and hardware.

There's probably more indicators of what's coming down this path. It doesn't look good.

I will reiterate: there is no way to enforce laws or policies like this without restricting the ability to modify the OS.

There is already a pre-existing push to bring attested computing to Linux.

The California law is not the only OS level age verification law passed or in the process of passing in the US.

One wonders if you're being intentionally obtuse.

Its about maintaining access to general purpose computing. There is no way to enforce laws or policies like this without removing the ability to modify the software running the computer.

Once that door is closed you can kiss 90% of what we love about computing goodbye.

They will solely be marketing and advertising platforms which you increasingly MUST use to interact with institutions private and public.

And by the way they'll be spying on and profiling on you even worse than is happening today, all fed into digital identity silos sold to anyone who wants it, including governments. Governments you like, and governments you don't.

You're trivializing how difficult tampering with OS internals in locked down secure boot environments can be. Just look at the state of Android custom roms. Devices that are years old can be impossible to modify the OS on.

Are you aware that there are bills along similar lines in a majority of US states and at least one is reported to require using identity validating services to ensure the age is correct?

How will that be accomplished?

How will these laws be ammended in the future?

I like rss2email sending to a local email box read with evolution or the like.

https://github.com/rss2email/rss2email

And they still try to pressure you to scan your face.

I don't want him going close to the cars because they've LITERALLY been pumping out pollution for 10-15 minutes (those early spots are very coveted). I have to tell my son to hold his breath when we bike on the empty sidewalk past these idling cars. It all just feels very anti-social and dystopian.

Yes, I'm sure there's absolutely nothing you're doing to engender the general atmosphere of distrust...

HN got a lot of refugees from Twitter and Reddit the past few years as well.

Its more the case that certain people decide X11 will no longer be supported and block anyone from trying to support it in "their" project.

The reason for its omission should be obvious. First, most people who "sideload" apps do not have ADB installed, and may not have the technical knowledge to do so. Second, the ability to do so can be taken away just as arbitrarily as the right to do so without it.

This implies corporate sponsorship is a requirement for, as opposed to result of, a projects usefulness. That has not been the case for most valuable open source software.

It would be really nice if all you people with deep insight into this issue would inform politicians of the unacceptable nature of things like this. - Submitted FTC and FCC complaints. Likely does no good but going silently into the night isn't going to to fix anything either.

There was a link on HN not long ago about how bird flu wasn't contributing to egg prices in the US anymore.

If people see the message "X is expected to rise in price!" enough they're more likely to bear the increase instead of curtailing purchases.

The linked article doesnt mention the agreement changing. Did it? If it did I can understand him not signing it.

However there was reporting prior to his arrival that he didnt intend to sign it, and considered it something that lower level officials could do. This was after the impression was given that he was coming to the US to sign it, as you admitted was his intention.

No one ever said they needed to. What gives you that impression

NATO membership for Ukraine is an attempt to call Russia's bluff that they wouldn't continue fighting, or escelate to nuclear weapons if Ukraine were admitted. That is a direct die roll on starting WW3 and Ukraine is not worth it.

To be clear European NATO partners do expect the US to go unlimited debt or die on the battlefield to protect them. It's called NATO.

I think you understood that I meant for Ukraine. If not, well, it wasn't difficult to see that's what I meant.

Yes, the US should, and I and most Americans do support, upholding Article 5 obligations.

As for Ukraine. Firstly the US has give much less than the EU.

I hope you're joking.

The US owes no one anything, but is it too much to ask that Trump goes hard on the ones who started the war, Russia, who...

The west collectively went hard on Russia. We gave Ukraine more of a fighting chance than anyone could possibly hope for. But Russia is winning. We will not escalate to risking WW3. Ukrainians are amazingly tough people and what happened to them is a tragedy, but its in their best interest to stop fighting and dying.

Zelensky went there under the pretext of signing the mineral deal, but changed his mind before arriving.

He's trying to pressure Trump and America in general into giving Ukraine NATO membership or security guarantees against Russia.

Sorry, but Ukraine, which is not in NATO and thus not entitled to unconditional defense, is not worth starting WW3 over.

Its sickening watching Zelensky and Europe act like my country is obligated to go into unlimited debt or die on the battlefield to protect them.

Hmm. If its possible now I wonder if it was happening before?