621–627 of 627 posts
I wish I could paste this as a prompt into a Codex Swarm and have it solve the government...
At least that would have more immediate impacts that the naiver stokes equations
Claude Executive: Damn, we hardly know who our users are, can't we just force them to say their full name or ban them? Claude Product Manager: No, that'll piss people off too much, and sadly we can't just ask for ID either... Claude Executive: There must be some way we can force people to link their government IDs with our platform so our analytics get better and more accurate? Claude Product Manager: We could limit…
I'm imagining a future where a bunch of bizarre laws interact oddly (as they do), and now we've got websites with unnecessary nudity pasted in the corner. "Oh, those? Those are just compliance tits. Ignore those. It's just a thing that came a few years after we finally got rid of the cookie banners. The companies wanted certain protections awarded only to 18+ sites. But you can't just declare yourself an 18+ site, so…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Banks by law require substantial PII in order to even do business with you. And those laws are extremely invasive and should be repealed. It's offensive to have a law that de facto requires you to identify yourself in order to pay for a newspaper subscription or buy contraceptives over the internet. But that's not the issue in this case. It's that the bank knows your name and what you buy -- already very bad -- but…
Can't you pay cash for things like Visa gift cards and use them online?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Whilst this is OP's point, the reality is the majority of big tech companies have been treating user data like radioactive waste for 10+ years. Most user data is of minimal economic value, until you leak it, and then suddenly there are millions of euros of fines headed your way. Better to not hold the data in the first place.
> majority of big tech companies have been treating user data like radioactive waste for 10+ years. They're collecting more than ever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
From TFA: Yoti is an independently audited age verification provider for SOC2 compliance. Your selfie, document images, and any personal data are deleted by Yoti as soon as your age is checked. Anthropic never sees your ID or image; we receive only a pass/fail result and do not process or store any personal data from the verification.
If you believe that you’ll buy my NFT.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Define bad parenting? Should the state do nothing about children not being sent to school? Should they go hungry when not fed? Should we just throw the kids in jail instead of programs that provide support? The libertarian "eh whatever" means of government has a lot of negative side effects too.
> Define bad parenting? Parents that do things that are bad for their kids wellbeing. > Should the state do nothing about children not being sent to school? Yes it should do nothing > Should they go hungry when not fed? Yes they should > Should we just throw the kids in jail instead of programs that provide support? These days modern jails are rehabilitation centres so its a moot point, but yes we should. I know this…
I'm sure you wouldn't feel the same way if you were that starving child or grew up with imperfect parents or in an environment that had actual hardships. This lack of basic empathy and introspection can only occur from someone who has been completely isolated from much of the real world their entire life. You are not arguing against perfect being the enemy of good, you are arguing against having any sort of good in the world at all, and it's obviously coming from a place of extreme comfort and luxury.
There's no chance you'd be saying anything like this if you had ever experienced anything close to poverty and starvation. Ironically, it appears having an upbringing that is too comfortable is what causes these beliefs in the first place.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's crazy that the top comment on HN these days is this kind of crackpot conspiracy thinking.
Trying to collect personal info might not be the motivation but it's not at all a crackpot theory. And what's the conspiracy aspect of calling a big company a liar? Your dismissal is so much weaker than the post you're replying to.
the conspiracy aspect is alleging a conspiracy without providing any evidence, which is apparently how 90% of people function now. Calling someone a liar because you invented a conversation in your head isn't entirely sane