My advice (even if you do decide to use a separate device for gaming) is to get rid of anything that does telemetry, tracking, ad service, or AI. If you have a pro version or enterprise version of windows 11 you can use Group Policy Editor to remove or disable a lot of stuff and what is left is usually taken care of by Registry Editor in the command line. You can find many guides online that will walk you through how to debloat and remove a lot of the stuff MS uses to track you. I recommend this for anyone who uses windows.

There’s also a lot of stuff you can turn off from the setting menu that may help if you’re privacy conscious. It also might not hurt to make your account local rather that one attached to outlook or MS services (I recognize this may not be possible depending on what you use for work).

You may also want to try a different distribution of Linux that’s specifically made for gaming. I don’t know what kind of graphics card you have but the proton compatibility layer has been getting better overtime and so you might give that a shot.

I don’t think you’re really addressing what I said. You took one thing out of it you didn’t like to argue about and left the rest as if it didn’t exist.

There is nothing stopping this establishment (regime, government, whatever you want to call it) from deciding that the Real ID is the only valid government ID and that state ID or Driver’s License isn’t a valid form of identification. You posit that the Real ID could in some way be invalidated or change the rules making it unstable for things like voting or identification in certain circumstances and that this is a reason to get a passport or a State ID.

This neglects states where it is illegal to have both a state ID and a driver’s license, people who can’t afford both, people who can’t afford a passport etc.

Most state websites will mention somewhere that a state ID acts as a form of identification within the state. Meaning the federal government could absolutely not consider it a valid form of identification. Other states aren’t even required to take your state ID as a valid form of identification.

You’re also neglecting that plenty of states haven’t enacted a mandatory Real ID program yet or it hasn’t gone into affect yet, however that may happen in a year, two years etc and so not getting a Real ID upon renewal will end up costing them more money they don’t necessarily have.

Your reasons for not getting a Real ID aren’t even particularly clear and you didn’t answer any clarifying questions.

What makes the Real ID more dangerous than a State ID or Passport?

How much more expensive is it to get a Passport than a Real ID?

Is the process to receive a Real ID in some way more of a risk to personal privacy?

If it is a risk, what are the risks to personal privacy while getting a State ID or Passport?

Is there a reason to believe that this regime or one in the future will preclude Real ID from being used to prove things like citizenship status or voting rights?

As in, not being able to readily Identify yourself because you don’t renew a license or state ID because you’re protesting the Real ID implementation and roll out is likely to result in you not receiving due process.

You either get a driver’s license or a state ID (which may be compliant with Real ID if it’s compliant). You generally can’t have both in any of the 10 states I’ve lived in.

I have been waiting over a year to get a passport. They’re so backed up that they literally just send you your documents back and ask you to reapply in a given amount of time. It’s also more expensive to get a passport than it is to get a driver’s license or “real ID” and you may not have the option to just not have one if you work somewhere that requires it (like an airport).

If your concern is that they might change the rules about being allowed to use Real ID for voting (or that having a Real ID would be a requirement for voting, excluding non-Real ID licenses or state ID’s because the government could potentially invalidate the ID you do have, I’m going to point out that in this time where ICE is literally stealing people off the street regardless of their legal status in the country and deporting them, what you’re suggesting doesn’t make sense especially with the higher bar of entry for a passport, and the fact that some states do not any longer provide any other option besides passport or REAL ID.

I feel like this is one of those situations where you might be able to use something like an NFC tag to force your phone into a locked state where it would require the pin to unlock.

I think an SOS style pin input is great in theory but I don’t know that most people will use it because it’s not necessarily going to help in places where you might be required or forced to give up biometric unlocking credentials (some countries make it so there is not a legal way to refuse to give up your fingerprint or face scan etc). This isn’t any easier than setting a lockdown key combination etc. Currently on my phone the lockdown is set to enable if I press the power button and volume up key at the same time and I think it’s similarly easy to do on iphones.

I feel like this is one of those situations where it also might be a workable idea to use something like an NFC tag to force your phone into a locked state where it would require the pin to unlock. If of course lockdown mode can’t be enabled on your device using a key combo and you have NFC available.

Technically, the other fob shouldn’t be affected if it works the way I think it does. There’s usually a maximum number of keys synced to the vehicle.

This attack basically forces the key fob the flipper zero is substituting itself for to fall out of sync because the flipper zero doesn’t transmit the rollover response from the vehicle back to the key fob. So the F0 sends the rolling code it intercepted from the key fob to the vehicle. Vehicle is like, yep, that’s matches, and then it does it’s rollover and sends out the rollover response. The response doesn’t get back to the key because of range etc and then the key remains a step behind the vehicle in the rollover sequence from then on out.

Technically I think they the key could potentially be resynced to the car. (My understanding is that a key of the correct type could be synced to any car that it can be programmed for so long as the key isn’t physically damaged, and the security module isn’t compromised with malicious code that would prevent it).

The commercial web that I use that might require ID would be for payment processing etc. My bank knows how old I am. I can and will pay bills directly through my bank instead of using their portal. Or they can explain to me in writing why they don’t want to take my payment. Just about everything else is optional.

Publishers have been suing libraries for book ban BS. Not for copyright infringement.

Yes they wanted it. If they’re legally considered a library, copyright holders can’t sue them for copyright infringement.

There have been a couple of lawsuits against the internet archive in this vein.

“The Internet Archive, a 501©(3) non-profit, is building a digital library of Internet sites and other cultural artifacts in digital form. Like a paper library, we provide free access to researchers, historians, scholars, people with print disabilities, and the general public. Our mission is to provide Universal Access to All Knowledge.” - from their About page.

Most of what I watch on YouTube are science videos, history videos, and cooking videos. I don’t get the “jailbait click bait” and I have never gotten that. My biggest problem with YouTube besides their ad BS is the random right wing propaganda videos that creep in.

I don’t watch a lot of shorts but if I happen to see one it’s most definitely not “jailbait”.

I mean. Let’s be real here Vine did it before Tik Tok was even a sperm in Bytedance’s ballsac. And it’s not like YouTube didn’t start out with short form videos. It’s just that they didn’t make it a separate video feed until 2020.

I can certainly understand not liking shorts (I often don’t have that kind of attention/need something more substantial than a 60 second clip). And yeah. Hatred for YouTube. I hear you. I get that too. But like this isn’t a new phenomenon.

You know that’s not what I’m saying. They would have been content to leave this woman without her account except that the threat of them looking worse in the media was held over their head. That’s the part that shouldn’t have happened. No company should be allowed to terminate an account used in the professional sphere while leaving no recourse to reclaim the account or appeal the decision in a straightforward and relatively low effort way.

I don’t like the way this article is written. There are concepts that it tries to convey that have major caveats it glosses over. Additionally it posits some ideas for alternatives that aren’t new currencies and doesn’t explain how most of them would work. It also seems to ignore the fact that content creators very often get paid in ad revenue by the very same companies that are exacerbating this problem with their GenAI models, as well as companies that are being hit hard by the lack of actual ad generated revenue due to loss of clickthroughs and impressions.

That being said it does actually somewhat explain a lot of the problem with the internet being sustained via ad revenue and ads.

Several of the companies who’s business model is built around ad aggregation are either investing in or developing/have launched GenAI products that are in opposition with their current business model.

They seem content at the moment to starve other places on the internet of the very ad revenue they rely on to make money. This will hurt them in the long run but they are focused on the short term profits they will make in the meantime and they do not seem concerned about the future so long as they can be seen to be on the cutting edge of the new technology.

I don’t really know if this will lead to a downturn in creator made content. A lot of paid creators are so invested in that eco system that they’d rather hop from one service to the next forever than give it up and go get a 9-5.

The pay as you crawl system is going to be difficult to implement, especially when crawlers already ignore the .txt file. The startups are not in a position to necessarily pay to license data and I question if they’d be able to pay as they crawl either. Meaning there will be big conglomerate gate keepers like Meta and Google and MS. The pay as you crawl system also only works if it’s regulated in some way so that normal users and small creators don’t get caught up in being victimized by bots/crawlers ignoring such rules or laws, with those victims unable to have their case taken seriously or heard at all.

As for determining where the information came from and providing attribution. Most people still aren’t going to click through to those pages. This is in part because a lot of them don’t want to see ads in the first place (for security reasons and because ads are an imposition on their increasingly limited time, energy, and attention). It’s also because they already have the information they need. You don’t care if Wikipedia gets your ad revenue so long as you can prove you were right about Brad Pitt’s height or his first job to your friend you made that bet with at the bar last night.

They say sources would be compensated. By who? And how? We have already established that people don’t think there’s a lot of value in pay for chatbots. The vast majority of Gen AI LLM users have shown (through polling, and introductory costs that go up in price later) that they aren’t interested in and don’t find value in pay for them. So conglomerates (many of whom run chatbots at a loss) would be on the hook both for paying for their crawlers and for providing such services to their consumers (corporate or not)? That most definitely not sustainable.

The other option is licensing but a lot of data has already been crawled and continues to be crawled without licensing or compensation.

I’m not sure that changing this business model will lead to anything good.

For it to have happened as a matter of course, and not when they faced the prospect of bad press over it, for a start.

I dunno. I feel like what this article is about is how Google is perhaps detrimentally changing the developer preview for android and how it might affect the developers who use it to develope their apps. It doesn’t necessarily have to be detrimental but if your app works in one developer preview but not in the next or vice versa, it’s easier to pinpoint what changes were made between previews when they’re tied to a specific developer preview number and you can tell which features have changed or been newly implemented.

They’re targeting actual creators rather than AI Slop though. Lots of creators have been talking about this.

I don’t think it’s just parents falling for this or older people.

I doubt that.

ISP’s give us access to the Internet. And we pay them for it. Google makes money via ad aggregation. We already know they were able to do this without siphoning up all your data because they literally made money doing it before 2004 when they launched Gmail. What you’re talking about already exists though. User subscriptions for Email, VPN’s, Search Engines etc already exist and people are using them. People are paying for them.

People also generally understand that if they aren’t paying for a service then they are the product. The thing is though, lots of those people are fine with ads so long as the ads don’t get in the way of them enjoying the product. If I open a website they don’t need to have a full page ad open up when the site page loads. But they do that anyway and that’s what people are largely pushing back against.

Additionally, if these companies want our data? They should do a much better job of safeguarding it, or be held responsible in a meaningful way.