You gotta be able to back up a claim like that with screenshots or something else other than hearsay. It's my impression that no one really GAF about the fediverse, or only pays lip service to it like Meta, which explains why it's so nice. It's only us nerds here willing to be our own algorithm. So I have a hard time believing this. Also, who still cares about comments on YT?

A lot of good ideas like that died when reddit pulled APIs or made access to them prohibitively expensive for developers. They are so set on making you use their shitty app.

[Find in Page:] "Parent"=0 "Parents"=0 "Father"=0 "Mother"=0

It's their job to guard their kids from this content first and foremost. It's their job to put it into context for their children. But the article doesn't even mention that any of this is a humongous failing of parents.

Next this commissioner will want to outlaw computer mice because they're used to click pornographic content without verifying the age of the finger on the button. And roads because adult content actors use them to get to jobs.

The way forward is not banning or making worse all sorts of useful tools as collateral damage in this "think of the children" campaign. It is to get all adult content everywhere behind a barrier toddlers cannot break. We were fine with porn mags partially obscured on the top shelf at a news agent when that was a thing. And the salesperson making sure the customer wasn't a minor. The solution isn't closing all digital news agents.

And it's quite telling that the existence of VPNs didn't play a bigger part in this UK online safety initiative. Like it wasn't obvious that when the west entrance to porn central was closed off, people wouldn't naturally look for the ones in east, north, and south.

Edited typo

First of all, this isn't enshitification as defined by Corey Doctorow. This has nothing to do with an internet platform getting worse because the priorities of the proprietors changed.

I don't think it's entirely fair to blame Google for this. None of these companies do this for entirely altruistic reasons. At the core of the problem is funding in education. Google saw an opportunity and jumped on it. When given a choice that kids get no computer hardware vs. dumping price Chromebooks I would still vote Chromebook. Get your politicians to set aside less money for tanks and more money for education.

Besides, no one is stopping kids from exploring other platforms. Google is looking for an infrastructure lock-in, get them locked in while they are young, but you can go do other stuff. It's also a question of financial means and interests. And they don't need to do LAN parties because they already have Fortnite and stuff. Life moves on. Your childhood was also markedly different from your parents'.

When you're in the top 5% it doesn't really matter where you rank. You will never have to worry about money ever again.

He is an oddity that became a tech press darling, i.e. somebody to report on although not everyone liked him, through PayPal and then his Facebook investment. So he occupied more press real estate than other, long forgotten silicon valley or hedge fund founders. But the fact that he was a founder and successful more often than not makes him the embodiment of the American dream. The immigrant kid that didn't enherit an emerald mine. The investor who didn't have to rely on daddy's wealth as much (or only) as 47. He stands out because he actually finished a degree, not like the Zuckerbergs and Gates of this world. I would say he's more intelligent than some of those people as well, possibly more strategic. And he has opinions, many of which are controversial to say the least. And if Melon Usk is an example of the in-your-face out-of-touch billionaire and Bill Gates an example of the more reserved out-of-touch do-gooder, Thiel is the more reserved out-of-touch do-weird-shitter. He doesn't mind the limelight but he doesn't really seek it. The Melon shows no signs any more of any long-term planning. Like a bladder weakened by ketamine use he just pisses all over everything he happens to stand next to. Gates has an agenda and applies his wealth strategically - and whatever your opinion about the good he actually does - the intention is to do good. Thiel is like that but the intention is to do rightwing libertarian stuff. Quietly, if possible. But there are eyes on him because of his past press "career." And I didn't know about his sexual orientation until quite recently - why should anybody care? - but my guess is that a weird idea spouting gay conservative cannot escape the prying eyes of a, let's face it, predominantly heteronormative press completely. And if you mix this all up you can see why his name keeps popping up. Especially when you consider who presses the diet coke button in the white house.

I think the sound you're hearing is a bunch of people creating throwaway accounts for this one. Not me though. I'm a saint.

I have sympathy for non-voters in the US. Not so much out of principle but because of how it is done. Voting takes place on a Tuesday. That's because in ye olden days you had to allow people to attend church on Sunday before making the trip on horseback to participate in the election. That's a cute tradition but clashes with the way the economy works today. People are very dependent on their low-wage jobs that they can be fired from easily. If you're working two of those jobs to make ends meet, you may not have the "luxury" to skip work to go and vote on a normal weekday. That luxury often includes having to fill in a booklet of stuff that's on the ballot. You're not just voting on a president, a senator, or a congressperson. You may be asked your option on a plebiscite, a judge, a sheriff, a school board, etc. It is overinflated in my view and explains long slow moving lines at ballot stations that you don't often see elsewhere. And that's after a possibly Kafkaesque registration process to be eligible in the first place or to get mail-ins in some states. It is almost designed to keep people away. Maybe you're taking these structural problems as something "politicians cling to."

Make election day a public holiday that forces businesses who are open anyway to allow all their employees to go and vote.

If I were a breaking bad meth dealer and had all my buyers as contacts on that phone and all my incriminating chats, I wouldn't use biometrics to unlock it. But I'm not a meth dealer (and I'm not just saying that because that's what a meth dealer would say).

There is a spectrum of convenience vs. security. It depends on where you sit. I'm okay with the fingerprint, wouldn't go for the face.

Doesn't Android have the panic/cop switch where you force password over biometrics unlocking? It's not a 100% failsafe but it is a start.

Technically, they don't have to be. They could elect a venerable whippersnapper cardinal - Dan Brown wrote a book about that. And that tells you how likely that is if he wrote the story. But it is possible.

It would be rare because it takes seniority to get into the position. And politics to be well liked enough to be put forward and then elected. By mostly old people. Some of whom would like the job themselves.

If Apple were the only player on the block, at least in Europe they would be under a lot more pressure. But they're not. There are other OSs (although only one really matters), there are other phone makers.

Antitrust is more reactive. There is a market, a dominant player, said player plays unfairly, the authorities react. That reaction takes years to go through all the levels of courts available. By the time we get a final ruling, the market has long moved on. The corporations know that too. As long as the lawyers are cheaper than the money they stand to lose they will carry on.

And in Apple's defense: the mobile operating system market is not that old. And it's not clearly defined. And as long as there is wiggle room they can do whatever they want. Part of the problem is that the legislation dealing with antitrust on either side of the Atlantic is like copyright law: no longer fit for purpose.

Word of mouth and time. Lots of it. All the ones that need you to be your own algorithm will take longer to gain acceptance with the general public. We'll need a few more Muskerbergian s-storms to motivate people away from the silos as well.

You're trying to apply conventional logic to this. Stop. They only want more power and money and they would say anything to get it.