I think I can elucidate. Veritable Quandry can check me on this, but I believe the technical term historians use for this sort of thing is "dick waggling."
In this case, "Mushroom menacing."
No, I'm thinking Anshe Chung (spelling?) and dick bombing. Some won't get the reference but most of the regulars will.
Flattered. Thank you. Extra bonus if Free's insulted.
I'm always insulted, so bonus points for everyone.Flattered. Thank you. Extra bonus if Free's insulted.
I miss the old cat profile pic, but I'm bias towards cats! ...and yeah, that expression is scary, lol.Flattered. Thank you. Extra bonus if Free's insulted.
bsky.app
First, I don't know about Brazil but certainly in the UK (and also, I thought, possibly mistakenly, the US) the separation of powers is very real and if, when the new Online Safety Act comes into force, an English judge upholds a decision by OFCOM, the communications regulator, to order UK ISPs to block
In point of fact, the Court of Appeal found in favour of the defendant since it found her tweets, offensive to the complainant though they doubtless were, didn't amount to the type of persistent harassment caught by the act.
Edward Luce (@edwardluce.bsky.social)
Inside the mind of a Silicon Valley fanatic. Peter Thiel makes Orwellian analogy bwtween today’s liberal democracy and South African apartheid - and calls for a truth and reconciliation commission to uncover the crimes of America’s “ancien regime”. Beyond nuts...
Evernote Link
The comments (which I can't get to copy to Evernote, unfortunately) uniformly agree Thiel is bonkers.
One paragraph in particular interested me:
First, I don't know about Brazil but certainly in the UK (and also, I thought, possibly mistakenly, the US) the separation of powers is very real and if, when the new Online Safety Act comes into force, an English judge upholds a decision by OFCOM, the communications regulator, to order UK ISPs to block
Second, the idea that the US government should complain about Australia (or anyone else) imposing age verification requirements on its own residents who wish to access adult content online, in the same way some US states do, seems bizarre.
Third, the offence involving "online speech triggering, among other things, 'annoyance, inconvenience or needless anxiety''" is that of
Persistently using a public communications network for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, or needless anxiety to another (s.127(2)(c) CA 2003). That is, as the judgment quoted at the link says, the offence is intended to catch persistent harassment, not prohibit the expression of potentially offensive views:
In point of fact, the Court of Appeal found in favour of the defendant since it found her tweets, offensive to the complainant though they doubtless were, didn't amount to the type of persistent harassment caught by the act.
The idea of the US government meddling in the administration of justice in the UK, Brazil or Australia seems outrageous. Theil's thesis seems to be "something I have read online upset me. Regardless of what or where it was, it upset me and the fact the US government of the day didn't do anything about it is a scandal."
I am always very suspicious when political or business experts try to talk about technological progress like it's an easily quantifiable, 2-dimentional graph that we just expect to go up. Or that the rate this goes up should have a "trend" of any sort. The far more complex reality is that every innovation has a story behind it and sometimes there are trade offs instead of just getting "better" in a clearly quantifiable way. It's also very naïve to think a particular technology should have infinite potential.
Yeah, these guys don't seem to understand anything "the line goes up!", and not just for money. Also, they seem to not get that at some point, Science Fiction is just that. Fiction.
Yes. This also is why it bugs me when well meaning people on the left say they want a "Star Trek" future. There is no guarantee any of that wonderful technology will ever arrive...
Well, get bugged, nerd, I want that.
