xianc78 @xianc78@gameliberty.club

"The European Union is considering major new restrictions on children's access to social media, including age limits, phased access, and an outright ban.

The panel recommended using a phased approach, including 'no screens at all' for children under 3, supervised internet use for those under 13, and some limits for older teens."

This is dumb. But it's even more disturbing that young people in the 11-13 bracket are being targeted by these nutjobs.

The internet is far more useful than not and these actions endanger a substantial percentage of young people in this age bracket.

Whatever rational you may think you have for restricting a younger audience is far in excess and abusive for 11-13. This is what was called helicopter parenting in the 90s.

Young people need to be let loose to explore the world on their own within this age bracket. If you haven't figured out how to prepare your kid to engage with the world given ~8-9 or so years of opportunity you've made some serious parental mistakes (and to one degree or another societal).

When ~8 year olds in many countries are let to roam the subways on their own and yet in many places within the US these same ~8 year olds would and often do get picked him by police in America for doing little more than walking down their own street to see if a neighborhood kid can come out and play there is something seriously messed up with a society.

Get over your fear mongering- there is not a white van driving through your neighborhood looking for kids to kidnap. That's an almost entirely fictional account, a single incident from the 1970s, and actual FBI data clearly shows that some absurd percentage of the 'danger' comes from parents, family members, and friends. Not strangers.

https://archive.is/o9Xcx

@admin @phoneboy @Pheonix When the big platforms go 100% "rented" content, I will own nothing because I will not be giving money to the big platforms.

When an independent platform or studio realizes the untapped well of frustrated privacy-supporters, gaming will have a resurgence without the enshittified platforms. Free market strikes again. (hint: GOG is doing precisely this)

oh speaking of that has anyone noticed that GDQ has been so irrelevant that nobody is even ironically hate watching it anymore?

https://x.com/ValerieAnne1970/status/2076667973952229461

"The Supreme Court concluded that ISPs cannot be held secondarily liable for user piracy unless they actively induce or tailor their services for infringement, which means that rightsholders will need an alternative enforcement tool."

Umm because they didn't get what they want your concluding that an additional tool is needed? That makes no sense. There ALREADY exists a tool. They just don't like the tool. These entertainment cartels HAVE NOT GONE UNDER as a result of the internet in the past 25 years so WHY would there be another tool needed???? The fact the supreme court didn't agree that the ISPs were liable is not a reason a new tool is needed given that for more than 25 years ISPs have NOT been liable. This isn't new this is old. It's been the status quo all along. It's not something that has changed. There isn't some new technology your claiming is the reason that a new tool is needed. It's literally the same law of the land as its been interpreted for 25+ years!!! The supreme court just confirmed it because the copyright cartel after 25+ years started to push the claim it wasn't WRONGLY.

IT'S OUT, maybe my biggest blog post to date.

Ever since the recording industry capitulated ending the P2P War, internet freedom has been SO GOOD that research into decentralized networking has practically stalled. Throughout the Western World, you can just stand up a website and post almost anything.

And because of that, nobody has been particularly motivated to move off of centralized ICANN DNS, IPv4, and x509 Certificate Authorities.

Now, governments are thinking about changing that. And while the apocalyptic amount of force it would take to actually end the open internet is almost certainly beyond them, the force it would take to end the era of bad centralized protocols could almost be applied by accident.

https://thegoodwork.substack.com/p/the-next-internet-war

Thanks @matty for the post.

@thomholwerda @SRAZKVT I understand why “no politics” can sound like an excuse to ignore real issues. That is not what I mean by it at BSD Cafe.

In my life, and in the history of people before me, I have seen politics used too many times as a justification to silence, attack, or dehumanise others.

To me, no cause, no ideology, and no political position gives anyone the right to be disrespectful or abusive. A community can and should protect people, be welcoming, and take real issues seriously without turning every interaction into a battlefield.

That is what “no politics” means to me: not indifference, but maturity. Not ignoring people, but making sure nobody uses politics as a weapon against them.

And honestly, I think that requires more spine than simply joining the loudest fight.

Because most states make it so even if you can get a license at 16 it’s heavily restricted. Where I grew up you still needed an adult over age 18 in the car with you and could have one other passenger over age 18. You also needed to take an expensive course when your turned 18 to get your full license.

Hence I just waited till I was 18 to do the drivers test and I just got a full license with no bs.

Backlog of Life
Roadmap of the Future

Currently there exist great federated communication protocols, including email and ActivityPub. There also exist powerful overlay networks such as Tor, I2P, cjdns, Yggdrasil and others. Even the DNS problem has been solved numerous times with Namecoin, ENS, Unstoppable Domains, PKT DNS, and others.

However, almost all federated protocols depend on IPv4 and ICANN DNS, because there’s currently no good way to federate across network boundaries.

(I have an idea)

My hot take guesses on what Sony will do going forward with their “no disc 2028” decision:

1) Stay the course. All digital as is.
2) Redefine digital ownership ala GOG style. Make their own used digital market.
3) Announce all new storage medium like they did with the memory sticks/UMDs.

Place your bets. 😈
#gamer #gaming #videogames #vidyagames

@mischievoustomato also they're erasing john romeros time when he pissed money away for a mid game and had an egirl do it because he said the magic word on stream

"I don't care about the personal life of this guy" types when it's someone they hate

"DuckDuckGo just gave its browser a feature that a lot of people have been waiting for. The privacy-focused browser can now block most video ads on YouTube"

Then I read a humorous or maybe disingenuous comment:

"Slashdot reader BrianFagioli argues that the feature raises questions about how creators are compensated when ad revenue is bypassed."

Creators don't make shit from YouTube advertising. They make their money by pimping often questionable products (though probably less questionable than the ads YouTube places in the videos) and services, selling t-shirts, and similar merch.

I have to wonder how these people come to the idea that this somehow impacts creators unless I've totally overlooked what this is doing. I'll admit I didn't read the story, but it sounds like 'blocking' here is akin to what uBlock Origin does based on the summary which is NOT an adblocker that blocks creator advertising. It blocks the wayyyy more annoying Google placed advertising that gets inserted or played while the content creators video is basically paused at random terrible spots in the videos. Google makes money off the advertising that is placed in this way, not creators. Creators make money off the products the creators pimp within the videos themselves.

My gut says this irrational questioning is basically a left-wing tactic trying to get you to think that the only answer is socialism.

This is far from the reality. Google long ago abandoned funding most creators. They had a revenue sharing program regarding its placed ads, but it's largely irrelevant for the vast majority of creators now. Unless your one of the top content producers your not making your money from Google advertising. The solution didn't depend on socialism, but entrepreneurial efforts.