Making all advertising illegal would quickly collapse society.

Why? Because for any given service, how would you even know it’s available at all, let alone the people providing it?

Our entire society as of now, and for the past few thousand years, has been so complex that people need to specialise and rely on each other for a lot of things. You rely on farmers, millers, bakers, butchers, etc. to provide your daily food. You rely on bus drivers, taxicabs, etc., for your transportation. On plumbers, sparkies, et cetera all for your home maintenance needs. Not to mention companies manufacturing and selling even more complex products you buy.

Without advertisement, how would you know what restaurants are nearby? Or who can repair your broken sink? Who can come out and repair that in-wall conduit? who you can hire to build your new house? where you can go to get entertained? are we banning adverts for the local theatre’s new plays? are we banning the local handyman from letting people know he provides said service?

I agree that today’s overkill advertisements are an issue, exacerbated by late stage capitalism that simultaneously wants to siphon your income both before and after you receive it, that having advertisements shoved down one’s throat should stop… But do you really think that banning ALL advertising is the way to go?

Unless you’re proposing the absolutely moronic libertarian stance of everyone relying upon themselves only for survival and continued existence, you can’t just ban all advertisements.

What would work is an incredibly heavy handed set of regulations that ensure the big players play fair, that ads aren’t using various psychological tricks to make you buy new shit you don’t need, that ads aren’t malicious and overwhelming, and so on. But even that is a scope of discussion that needs to take place over years, with a multitude of experts involved, not just one person willy nilly going “ads are bad mmmmkay so they’re now banned”.

To a certain degree I agree with the assessment - children (under-16 would be my definition here) shouldn’t have full access to what we consider social media today.

Things were different 10, 20 years ago when it wasn’t so centralised. You’d have independent forums, all with reliable moderation, and so on, plus with little to no ads, and the ad networks themselves were more inclined to not have inappropriate things shown, especially to children - basically all the “make your dick grow 7 foot long” and “8 cock hungry MILFs waiting for you in your area” type of ads were all relegated to porn sites to begin with.

Today? We have centralised social media with little to no moderation beyond basic keyword filtering, ad networks not giving a fuck about the content they push, and every single malicious actor having access to these platforms to further their agendas… Not to mention unfettered access to children by any and all accounts.

What IMO would be the best solution is to force social media sites to have a cordoned off “children” section where kids can socialise with their peers without predatory adults having any form of access to them. But that’s easier said than done, unfortunately.

Sorry sir, we only ship packages either East to West, or West to East.

Well at least if we were on the Stargate timeline, we’d have:

• SG1
• the literal city of Atlantis (seriously, like, when can I move in?)
• if all else fails, plan C(4)

Has the accuracy of the snapshots actually changed based on this edit? After all, if it’s factual information being presented…

I do agree that it raises the issue of what other modifications there may be, and it IS childish, but so is going after a person who provides a good service and wants to remain anonymous while doing so.

All I’m saying is that while I do not agree with the actions, I also am not saying I don’t understand the reasoning behind.

Dunno if I would call it “behaving poorly”.

The blogger in question doxxed the owner/maintainer of Archive.today who in return doxxed the blogger. To me this sounds more like eye for an eye FAFO.

Sitting on a patent, not implementing it, while also not allowing others to implement it, is a form of patent trolling.

Hell I’d even go as far as to call what Qualcomm does with their 4G/5G patents, trolling (they basically offer to sell patent licensing but it’s generally much more expensive to get the license AND develop+manufacture your own modem with it than to buy modems from Qcom directly, which is essentially stifling any potential innovation on the modem market).

SNW is not yet post-replicator times.

ENT had protein re-sequencers and TOS/SNW/DIS has some level of food processors, but not exactly replicators (DIS did mess up the canon a little bit though, for that one burrito scene…)

Though arguably the same logic applies since it’s the captain taking out precious time from his schedule to prepare a meal for up to 15-20 people at a time, something the ship’s galley would be more suited for (after all the whole point of having a galley and kitchen is that the officers can focus on their work instead of chores).

There’s no curbing capitalism. The very thesis of it requires that the most successful 1, find 2, exploit 3, lobby to lock up enough, so to “pull up the ladder behind themselves”, any and all loopholes of the legal system that allows them to get ahead.

You can try regulating it but capitalism will always find a way around your rules.

Resist and find other ways to do the thing… which is literally what kids do.

Do you want your kids to be on Roblox with your knowledge and occasional oversight, or without your knowledge at all, without any parental control?

Blames it on nonexistent “far left” in an attempt to push the general Overton window to the right even more

Compared to some dark romance? Sure. I mean, very, very few things will top the femur scene in I Will Break You (the trigger warnings specifying “inappropriate use of thigh bone” were NOT joking), so compared, indeed tame.

But for your average non-smut reader, there’s a lot of emphasis on… milking.

Though still not as full of smut as e.g. Kiss Of The Basilisk. Which is like, 98% pure porn.

Their own operations could be filtered out by a simple allowlist…

80% of patent work is coming up with ideas and filing them. The remaining 20% is ensuring there’s no prior art, prior patents, etc.

Besides, patent trolling is not completely negative. The silver lining is that the same system that allows this, also allows e.g. Sony to perpeetum own the patent for interactive TV ads that require the user to yell a word at the TV to ensure they’re watching the ad. Sony owns the patent but never implemented it, nor did they license it to others.

Now imagine what would happen if you had to implement your patent into a commercial product or lose the rights to it…

More like to have another patch…

Not really a liability. A friend. Fake his death, put him away in a different country where he won’t be recognised, add some basic plastic surgery, a beard, long hair, and bam you just got away with decades of crime.

Resolution has little to do with blurriness.

I can grab a 200MP sensor with the best lens systems and autofocus algorithms, and you’ll still take blurry pictures.

Shutter speed, steady hands, and the relative radial movement speed of the object compared to the camera is what matters.

Now, imagine this: you’re a tourist, with an average phone. Say, an iPhone 16 Pro Max. You spot a guy that looks like Epstein, from across the road or even a plaza. He’s walking away so you have seconds to: pull your phone out, open the camera, zoom in, focus on the face and take photos. How will those photos turn out?

I mean you can literally try this yourself by going out into public and replicating the circumstances. Target must be at least 20-30 meters away, and you’re starting from a resting position (not phone in hand, camera open, ready to shoot, that’s not life-like). Unless you’re a pro photographer… those photos will turn out blurry.

porn is risk-free reward

for the watcher, sure, but for the actors?

also don’t underestimate porn addiction. people can spend thousands of dollars on such addictions.

No, actually. Spoiled here refers to the edibility by humans (aka the bacteria and toxic waste of said bacteria is below safe levels), and it’s no longer living tissue given the animal has been killed and butchered.

Ah, I missed that part. To be fair I was only 15 at the time and not that interested in international news 😅