231–240 of 246 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the authoritative root server set is maintained by ICANN, so they have ultimate control (for now) and can essentially dictate terms for all TLDs. I wonder whether we wventually see some other power establish their own root servers which mirror only the parts of ICANNs DNS that are politically convenient to whoever does this.
So far root servers haven’t done stuff to ccTLDs
Not going to claim anything regarding Anna’s Archive’s legitimacy, but what do libraries look like in the future? We’re just going to give up and say, first sale was great while we had it, but digital makes it obsolete? When you die, screw donating your collection of “licenses” to somewhere productive; those contracts died with you? Everything is streaming, so you never purchased anything anyway? It’s crazy to me tha…
> It’s crazy to me that two decades after the iTunes Store the trade and resale of digital goods isn’t protected by law. You aren't buying a digital good, you're buying a limited license to use that digital good.
So other options exist, it's just that most people (and authors) don't give a flying fuck and give their money to bloodsuckers
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I work at a nonprofit and the board is largely university librarians. I am asking all of them how have the behavior of their patrons changed in the last five years. How has usage of their subscribed resources changed in the age of AI. They don't share much, but their facial expressions and silence share more than they mean them to. Some universities have cut staff, or reclassified them so that they won't receive bene…
> They don't share much Why not?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Whenever you have control over somebody else's organism, suicide isn't something which makes sense definitionally, even if his own body was used to kill him. > your vendors are likely neurocompromised as well. What in the world are you talking about.
There is a long history of militant and/or criminal (what's the difference) usage of adversarially designed brain-computer interfaces that you will not find documented. Unless you have proper clearance or are involved with one of the parties propagating them, anyway.
Then how do you know about it? This sounds extremely made up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Whenever you have control over somebody else's organism, suicide isn't something which makes sense definitionally, even if his own body was used to kill him. > your vendors are likely neurocompromised as well. What in the world are you talking about.
Much of the drug trade is ran less than consensually, as is common knowledge. Often even people envolved aren't even aware these technologies are being utilized, to those who are, their position is often simple: you do what we say or we torture you, even in protective custody, as surgery isn't really practical.
That claim falls apart as soon as it touches reality: there are a _lot_ of people who are involved in the drug trade, now and in the past. At some point, one of those people would definitely have had a CT or an MRI on their skull (e.g. my dentist does a whole head CT every 5 years as part of the normal process and insurance pays for it). Surely _one_ of those people would have noticed a brain implant.
This sounds extremely made up.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a long history of militant and/or criminal (what's the difference) usage of adversarially designed brain-computer interfaces that you will not find documented. Unless you have proper clearance or are involved with one of the parties propagating them, anyway.
> There is a long history [...] that you will not find documented. Then how do you know about it? This sounds extremely made up.
It's not just the drug trade, and torture isn't even the primary focus of the technology.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Much of the drug trade is ran less than consensually, as is common knowledge. Often even people envolved aren't even aware these technologies are being utilized, to those who are, their position is often simple: you do what we say or we torture you, even in protective custody, as surgery isn't really practical.
To be clear, your claim is that 'much of the drug trade is r[u]n less than consensually' via some kind of undocumented, unknown-to-most brain implant that can be used to remotely torture people for non-compliance? That claim falls apart as soon as it touches reality: there are a _lot_ of people who are involved in the drug trade, now and in the past. At some point, one of those people would definitely have had a CT o…
The tech is adversarially designed, you're assuming the medical supply chains are not compromised, and are dramatically underestimating the sophistication involved here generally.
You can't even assume the people interpreting the results are uncompromised, are trained to interpret results in the context of adversarial technology, or are even physiologically able to accurately interpret what they are looking at. This has it's roots in military intelligence, it's not a trivial compromise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Not everyone is willing to pirate books, Practically no one is willing to do it. They'd have to be interested in books first. And no one is. Not only is "books" not the first thing in your list, it's not even the last thing. Books might have once been seen as luxuries, and the idea of a lending library allowed those in poverty to get a taste of wealth, so to speak... but they get dumped into landfills by the trucklo…
Books might have once been seen as luxuries, and the idea of a lending library allowed those in poverty to get a taste of wealth, so to speak... but they get dumped into landfills by the truckload today and can be had for pennies (or fractions of pennies, actually). Well those ones might be, but the ones I want sure aren't. I have to moderate my book-purchasing to avoid over-spending. The library is pretty helpful (r…
I sympathize, but do it smarter. I downloaded 500 or so last week, and it was a slow week. Mostly I mine Hacker News and /pol/ (it's actually only half as bad as reddit once you ignore Mein Kampf) for recommendations... but ran a little short on those. Coming up with new titles to procure is tough.
>I guess where this train of thought is going is to point out that people like me do exist.
I know! There are half-dozens of you out there! And I know I struck a nerve, because HN hates "my anecdote counters your intended generalization" except when you have to examine hard truths about yourselves.
>very strongly suggesting that people like me are a rounding error.
A rounding error on a rounding error.
>Almost 80% of the sales are physical rather than digital
Physical sales are dead. If you listen to anyone who writes and has written for the last 20 years or more, you'll hear all sorts of heartache stories about what sales are like now compared to back before it all fell apart. It's dead. And it's never coming back. Your grandchildren, if you have any, won't even know how to open a book.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
To be clear, your claim is that 'much of the drug trade is r[u]n less than consensually' via some kind of undocumented, unknown-to-most brain implant that can be used to remotely torture people for non-compliance? That claim falls apart as soon as it touches reality: there are a _lot_ of people who are involved in the drug trade, now and in the past. At some point, one of those people would definitely have had a CT o…
>At some point, one of those people would definitely have had a CT or an MRI on their skull The tech is adversarially designed, you're assuming the medical supply chains are not compromised, and are dramatically underestimating the sophistication involved here generally. You can't even assume the people interpreting the results are uncompromised, are trained to interpret results in the context of adversarial technolo…
Do you have literally any proof? Otherwise, this is all just a silly made up story as far as I’m concerned.