xianc78 @xianc78@gameliberty.club

Think of the children nutters just won their first lawsuit against Facebook for not 'doing enough' to protect children (as if they had ANY obligation to do so in the first place!):

If you think Facebook is so dangerous because of a few bad apples then don't hand your kid an internet connected device and point them at Facebook. I've been on the internet since the internet came into existence and there have ALWAYS been bad apples on it. In fact BEFORE the internet there were also bad apples in the real world, on the school playground, and on BBSs.

The threat of the internet on children is so over exaggerated. While it's undoubtedly true you can setup fake 'child profiles' and get predators to send you inappropriate materials/messages and so on... it's hardly the typical experience. Minors are far more likely to get bullied by PEOPLE THEY ACTUALLY know from the offline when going online than be sexually harassed by the equivalent of creepy men driving 5 mph in white trucks without windows.

Statistically it's dad, mom, or someone in the family that's going to sexually abuse a child, not some creepy person on the internet.

And if the concern is algorithms... that's just pure fear mongering. There use to be this thing called parenting. If your kid was spending too much time watching TV you click the off button on the TV and told them to go play outside.

I hate to break it to you psychos who think it's always someone else's problem... but you can still tell a child no. You can still choose not to give your [at least actual children, teens will undoubtedly get around your stupid control freak parenting] 10 year old a cell phone.

To the 20 year old 'victim' take responsibility for your own choices, your 20 for christ sake.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/03/meta-loses-trial-after-arguing-child-exploitation-was-inevitable-on-its-apps/

Starting to look a little desperate...

I include all kinds of links, even links to theories or analysis that brings me to certain conclusions:

https://battlepenguin.com/politics/

I think it makes a pretty massive difference when writing news summaries. Not only can others easily see exactly how you've drawn your conclusions, but I've often found I had thinks incorrect, or found only misleading sources when I try to drill down certain stories or narratives. It does improve the quality of the analysis. James Corbett has been doing it for decades.

CERN: First successful road transport of antimatter.

https://home.cern/news/press-release/experiments/base-experiment-cern-succeeds-transporting-antimatter

https://rumble.com/embed/v75cw9w/?pub=1h5b6y

Content managed by ContentSafe.co

So basically, when the US government makes a law, it's kind of considered like "Putin makes a decree".

Nobody spends a whole lot of time asking themselves if it's constitutional or not because 80% of the federal government is unconstitutional, the only real "law" in America is law of the strong.

There is this whole court battle circus side-show that's constantly going on over what the judiciary is willing to tolerate and what they're not. And this is totally arbitrary based on the judges feel is "reasonable" - and since we've already fully departed from anything related to the written word of the law, that's entirely their personal discretion.

I imagine there probably IS some kind of a secret system by which powerful people settle disputes - and it probably projects its decisions onto the de-jour system by pressuring judges one way or another.

Who knows how it actually works, I only surmise that it probably exists because a system which depends entirely on the mood that a judge is in today would probably have already collapsed in on itself.

A lot of American law basically boils down to "fuck you gonna do about it"...

The US Constitution is in fact extremely strict about what the federal government is allowed to do. Stuff like income tax, food and drug regulation, narcotics laws, gun laws, etc are ALL ILLEGAL.

And they basically just ignore the law, and then play childish word-games with the meaning of things like "commerce" (wickard v filburn) so that they can just re-interpret the Constitution into saying whatever they want it to say.

A good reminder that what is dominant now doesn't necessarily need to be so and will likely fail to endure long term.

#business #culture #tech

RT: https://noauthority.social/users/Killer_Mule/statuses/116249958577769136

Rigel does not exist #AIArt #midjourney

@sendpaws@mitra.pawslut.party I was invited during the beta, but uninterested. When I checked it out again, I was blocked by 30 people before I had ever made a single post. I only knew one of them, the rest were all complete strangers. Still confused about that.

1/3 of Bluesky users delete their account. In a way, the same thing that played out in the political side of fedi plays out there daily.

The difference is with blocks and lists, everyone is at each other's throat and then posting a post asking "what the fuck, why are we at each others throat". I've seen how miserable it is checking up on someone you know and seeing how their TL is literally just an endless stream of "Dad, it's over bro". It's genuinely the worst place to talk about stuff.

Something else funny is how radicalized Bluesky users get. At least on Twitter you can smash like and "not interested" enough time and get some esoteric VINTAGE RETRO AESTHETICS and furry art on your TL.

On Bluesky, you can mark you're interested in that and get pumped 20+ posts about Trump, Elon Musk, the latest thing in the 15 minute news cycle, here's a bad thing, before getting to the meat and potatoes.

This was cute - I needed a quick round of something silly tonight.

US government just mandated all new routers sold in the US include a backdoor via proprietary blobs.

To understand this you have to understand that all the SoCs in consumer grade routers are produced by non-US entities or US fabs in Arizona or Texas. These SoCs depend on propritary components that are more than likely backdoored by the US government.

What we know for sure is that other x86 CPUs from Intel have had their backdoors discovered and were developed to be deniable. That is they were introduced through security vulnerabilities that could be exploited to gain remote control. The remote control component is a security threat found in modern x86 CPUs from Intel and AMD. These backdoors are in proprietary software components. The US gets around their own vulnerabilities through a bit that when set allows the device to effectively not load the vulnerable component or part of said component thereof.

This appears to not necessarily apply to non-wifi routers.

It also does not apply to previously imported routers.

The only non-backoor'd routers that are legal [maybe, sort of, pre-dates the ban] would appear to be routers from ThinkPenguin.com and possibly new routers without wifi capabilities.

https://www.theverge.com/news/899172/fcc-foreign-router-ban

_NEWS: Lab-Grown ‘Milk’ Will Soon Flood Global Food Supply_

https://makisw.substack.com/p/news-lab-grown-milk-will-soon-flood

Would fedi be interested in a "best game ever" tournament? Like, nominate your top 3 favorites or something and then they get put in a bracket like the anime girl and vtuber ones.

if you are on the border years of two generational lines, like boomers or zoomers or gen z whatever, then you don't belong to any of them. It just means you will be spit roasted by both generations and fit no where

gen L