- This law demands a surveillance architecture, not just porn regulation. Once the norm and mechanism to de-anonymize content use exists, it can be expanded to any content, including political dissent, and for both accessing AND contributing to content (like, for example, on HN). The line should be drawn here.
The vague potential harm of sex doesn't justify the concrete harm of abolishing digital privacy. Further, it's just sex. Equating imagery of legal, natural activity with physical danger is an error.
It is blatantly dangerous to justify stripping citizens of their anonymity. The lawmakers who proposed this are oppressors. They are the danger to our children.
- I am not challenging the safety release mechanism. The OP already demonstrated that.
I am challenging the result of that release in your poorly framed experiment.
You explicitly sought to test 'a different side of the spectrum.' You cannot equate a holistic character judgment with a narrowed, specific medical safety protocol judgement.
A clean account without memories will solve the tie-breaker issue. It will not solve the poor experimental design.
- That comparison is flawed. You guided the LLM to judge a specific medical policy, whereas the OP asked for a holistic evaluation of the candidates. You created a framing instead of allowing the LLM to evaluate without your input.
Furthermore, admitting you have 'memories' enabled invalidates the test in both cases.
As an aside, I would not expect that one party's candidate is always more correct over the other for every possible issue. Particular issues carry more weight, and the overall correctness should be considered.
- It does include employment. It's discussed in terms of "employment" or "jobs" thresholds and trends.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recession
> In the United States, a recession is defined as "a significant decline in economic activity spread across the market, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales."[4] The European Union has adopted a similar definition.[5][6]
- That's interesting, and I think I've seen that writing style before, although it might have been in infosec circles. What do you mean by the mimicry and viewpoints?
It does seem to be used to signal prestige more than in-group membership in general. I perceive it as mildly haughty.
Also, I don't think acrolect is the right term here, because the all-lowercase style is both not a creole and is not a closer approximation to standard English than some lower form of all-lowercase.
If you need a linguistics term call it a register.
- Not to be that guy, but feed/enclosure are direct costs.
Externalities are costs/benefits to someone uninvolved with the chicken/egg transaction (noise or free insect control affecting your neighbor are negative and positive cases).
- Cellular radios also have this capability. There's work done to track individuals in this way (matching your walking pattern/gait).
https://www.hackerneue.com/item?id=44416761
Signal processing is probably a general problem. This month we had news about transcribing speech from sound waves jiggling a regular computer mouse.
https://www.theregister.com/2025/10/07/mouse_microphone_secu...
- I think you're relating coal as a percentage of all energy rather than relative to itself year on year.
The data here shows that coal consumption is simply increasing in China. Therefore, I believe it is inaccurate to say "they are building more plants but starting to burn less coal." It is more accurate to say "they are building more plants and burning more coal, but they are not increasing their coal use at the same rate they increase their use of other energy sources."
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co2-coal?tab=line&...
Our World In Data gets that information from https://globalcarbonbudget.org/. I believe that the next update will include 2024 data, and should be available next month.
My reason for challenging the phrasing is just to be precise. This is a complex topic, and the distinction between a falling percentage of energy mix versus a rising absolute amount of consumption is a key detail that's often missed.
- I looked up the amount of blood lost due to a menstruation cycle, and the answer is around 50 ml.
OP's linked paper has "the iron-reduction patients had 300ml of blood removed at the start of the trial and between 250 and 500ml removed four weeks later."
A blood donation removes 500 ml, so about a year of menstruation all at once. You can donate every two months, besides.
So, yes, if there is an effect then we might expect the magnitude of the effect to differ. Or else we'd expect a paper cut to also have the same effect.
Sex biological difference could matter as well.
- Yes, but the relative amount per volume blood should be the same. I think that's why he's asking.
If so, the answer is that the body replenishes plasma in a day and red cells in six weeks (redcrossblood.org FAQ). The relative amount does change quickly.
- The details are skimpy. In a CNN article we can see photos and mention that these were housed in apartment units and perhaps other rentals.
https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/23/us/swatting-investigation-ser...
EDIT:
While the headline on NYT highlights an attack on the towers for disruption, the CNN piece gives more weight to two other uses: (1) criminal communication network and (2) swatting.
I think those two make sense. The SIMs would probably hold US numbers and would appear authentic for accessing the US operators' networks.
- Reputation harm.
An anonymous individual might also have multiple anonymous accounts, for example. Without that anonymity, other projects might ban their contributions, and users might not use their software.
- To add on, the fundamental question is which risk is more palatable for something we "can't afford to fail?"
Is the risk of a hospital closing for purely financial reasons more or less acceptable than the risk of a state-run hospital being inefficient but guaranteed to exist? For critical infrastructure, I think that's a conversation worth having, and it's one that hand-waving about an all-encompassing 'market' obscures; dismissing a legitimate critique by framing the market as an all-encompassing force is just a rhetorical move.
Your comment seems to suggest that any attempt to change the market results in unfavorable results, but this doesn't hold up to scrutiny. I think you replied with a valid philosophical point, but you leaned too much on using it to challenge that anything could be done (when you yourself presented the idea that a mechanism was needed).
There is no such unmanipulated free market anywhere:
Perfect Competition: In reality, we have monopolies, oligopolies, and immense barriers to entry.
Perfect Rationality: Behavioral economics has thoroughly demonstrated that people do not act like perfectly rational, self-interested computers.
Perfect Information: There is almost always a significant knowledge gap between a seller and a buyer.
Since no truly free market exists, every economy is already a managed one. The real debate isn't whether we should intervene, but how we intervene and whose interests those interventions serve. I read selimnairb's point as that, for essential services, the rules should serve the public interest of stability and access, not just the private interest of profit.
We can examine the risks case-by-case. Here, the government is investing in a foundry. We could view the leverage this gains the US government as increasing the risk for political engineering above the previous risk of financial engineering. In financial engineering, Intel might prioritize its obligation to shareholders. In political engineering (if Intel were nationalized), Intel might keep an inefficient fab open to save jobs or just to win votes.
In the category of financial engineering as a risk, you might lump activity like stock buybacks put above R&D as exemplar of Intel. In fact, a criticism of CHIPS and this new government intervention often centers around the idea that Intel's leadership should not be rewarded.
Finally, a related case on the topic of Intel and national security: China's state-directed economy prioritizes national goals over private profit. After entering "the market," part of its core strategy has been to compel service to national interests rather than shareholders, and it seems that strategy has arguably driven its recent economic rise.
- I agree with your point about OP's statement regarding "where is not not needed Windows in any way, to the Remote Device Management baked into firmware as Apple does with its hardware" I also read that to mean that the firmware solution is self-contained and complete, even though that's pretty misaligned when you consider the meaning of a "remotely" managed device (remotely managed by what?).
But it's still entirely factual in my own description. When a device checks in during initial setup, the firmware-level boot process can receive policies that block alternative OS installation, and that absolutely is a feature of the firmware.
Anyway, I tried to interpret OP's meaning, and provided more detail on how Apple's firmware is special.
- Yeah, your point about implementation is correct -- much of the MDM functionality runs within macOS.
But, eh, I still think it's fair to describe it as a feature of the firmware. The enrollment and prevention of removal have firmware-level components through Apple's Secure Boot and System Integrity Protection. A user can't simply disable MDM because these firmware-level protections prevent tampering with the enrollment.
Case in point, getting Linux installed in the first place would be blocked by firmware-level boot policies, right? I'm not too knowledge about this, and maybe you are more so.
- If I understood it well enough, the intention was to formalize/standardize self-hosting such that it became easier (and with an emphasis on security).
With that done well, perhaps the next step would have been ready-made images. I could see it reducing friction for people if they'd rent a VPS, upload an ISO/IMG, and the resulting system was reliably secure. Then they'd use the Sandstorm interface to install apps with a web GUI.
There is still a roadmap documented here:
https://github.com/sandstorm-io/sandstorm/tree/master/roadma...
- Apple devices support MDM. When you purchase the device, the device's firmware is configured to check in with an account owner. The firmware has an integrity feature such that this configuration cannot be removed by a user: https://it-training.apple.com/tutorials/deployment/dm005/
If OP just meant remote management through a BMC then that's not common except for server hardware, and it would have features like Redfish to configure the hardware itself. Apple devices don't have this.
You can also buy hardware to act as a remote keyboard/mouse/monitor and power button, and it supports systems whose motherboards have the right headers: https://pikvm.org/
https://www.aorus.com/en-us/monitors/s55u