You’ll gain first, second, and third level butts and prepare them to use them. While we start with Cure Wounds, we get ones that can influence investigations (Charm Person or Speak with Dead) or can affect the environment or ourselves (Barkskin and Aura of Vitality).
Are spells called butts in this game? Am I missing a joke? Do I have some browser plugin installed that I forgot about? Does the writer’s immature friend have unmonitored access to their computer?
If they require authentication with some identity checking company, that’s really bad
Not sure what your point is, do you not like how I worded that? I’m saying it’s a bad thing, do you think it’s a good thing, or missed the second half of the sentence? Not using AI to write comments is something I take pretty seriously, so please don’t cast doubt on its humanity just because what I write is long and verbose and not in complete agreement with you, I am a real person who has put effort into laying out my thoughts and this hurts my feelings.
If your point is further restrictions to children’s access to social media being broadly unpopular, unfortunately that isn’t accurate. This is why I’m taking a contrarian position here despite believing free computing should take priority; if people want this, and it’s going to happen in some form, maybe a compromise that doesn’t involve the worst losses of privacy and control is the best available path forward. If not, I want to hear arguments why not, or alternative plans, because the ones I can think of aren’t totally convincing.
I actually did data labeling work on amazon mturk for a while, it does kind of suck, the main saving grace was I could largely do it on my own schedule but I assume these people don’t really get that benefit.
being sent to offshore contractors for data labeling, a widely-used preprocessing step in training new AI models in which human contractors are asked to review and annotate footage.
From another article I read about this, seems like it involves a lot of drawing precise boxes around people and objects, stuff like that. Terminators gotta learn their sex moves from somewhere.
What a waste, make all these people spend years of their lives building a whole videogame and then immediately make it impossible for anyone to ever play it again. A company shouldn’t have the right to erase a game from existence, even if it is a bad one.
Forcing everyone to use an approved OS is draconian.
I agree, but my point is that it wouldn’t be that easy to do either. I am hopeful that a system where servers take the OS’s word for it that you are in a certain age category would not smoothly transition into one where they also need proof that the owner of the hardware cannot decide that category, and that the system working this way would be accepted as a long-term status quo like those age selection menus were, because it would be actually a bit more effective at stopping kids who don’t know how to reinstall an OS so legislators could plausibly claim they did something without extra changes.
I have a Garmin gps for my car, it does have wifi and bluetooth but my hope is that it’s enough that I have these disabled in the settings and never used them to connect to anything.
I thought it was weird that ENS was not mentioned, found this interesting argument in the talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Alternative_DNS_root#ENS_removal, apparently it has been censored. Edit: I guess that was a pretty long time ago though
What about GPS devices that are not phones
I’ve heard a lot about how cheap and effective solar + battery tech is getting, will a new nuclear plant even still be worth it to operate after the ten years or whatever it takes to construct?
Probably more associated greenhouse gas emissions than the plastic one
At least there’s some nontrivial additional challenges to make the jump, such as authenticating the user is on an approved OS, and the infrastructure for identity verification itself. I like this better than other age verification mandates because those make the latter the first step, fueling the growth of surveillance tech and the companies providing it as a service.
It’s possible for them to stream to multiple platforms simultaneously, it’s common for streamers to do twitch and youtube at the same time. If the tools make it easy enough they might do it despite no potential to make money right away.
Using authority for the personal gratification of feeling powerful
Valid worry, and I would prefer no such legislation, but I can picture a more optimistic outcome where this diffuses demands for more invasive and anticonsumer verification because it would somewhat address the problem of population scale psychological harm to children that there seems to be public consensus about. The sense of “something must be done” is currently giving repressive authoritarian tech an excuse to be implemented, and while there are strong arguments for why that tech is more dangerous and oppressive than it could possibly be worth, the arguments for how the problem can be addressed instead are much weaker. People often point to parental responsibility and the possibility of setting up parental control software, but this argument has some glaring weaknesses; the problem exists on a collective rather than individual level, exists despite the current possibility of parental action, and the argument does not point towards any real hope of improvement.
This all comes back to the reality that the way we use software is largely dictated by the design of that software. Defaults matter a lot. What I like about this solution is that it would work by adjusting defaults, not asking users to take extra initiative, and leaving ultimate control up to the person who bought the hardware. It would be possible, but difficult to get around it for children who can’t easily acquire their own hardware, and so most of them just wouldn’t, which means there is an actual possibility of it being part of an overall solution to the problem.
Whether it’s the best, or a good solution, I do have some doubts about. Banning children from any participation in public discussion seems like a bad thing for a variety of reasons, and it’s easy to see any sort of effective age verification going there immediately. The ability to check the OS for age category would mean an avenue for practically enforceable legislation about how online services must treat users by those categories, and most of that legislation can be expected to suck. And of course there’s the risk you mention that the law is expanded to try to prevent the hardware owner from actually being in any sort of control. Still, the problem is real, and I don’t think the invasive solutions are going to be defeated without proposing effective noninvasive solutions.
It might not be so bad if it was just entering the age of the device’s user when setting it up, since in that case the system would be essentially just a standard for parental controls.
Assembly Bill No. 1043 was approved by California governor Gavin Newsom in October of last year, and becomes active on January 1, 2027 (via The Lunduke Journal).
Sounds like it already passed
Something about the way that garage is organized is so nice
But if OP does know and applies that knowledge to what they are doing, it’s not the same thing and doesn’t make sense to have the same disclaimer.