Considering they are only harming themselves
Again, we’re talking about actual children. You know: people that have yet to mentally develop to the point where they can make fully informed decisions on everything and sometimes have to be “coerced” by reasonable adults into doing so.
There’s this wild, outlandish idea that kids don’t have the maturity, experience, or impulse control to make informed and rational decisions all the time. Thus we don’t give kids the exact same rights and responsibilities we give to adults – they gradually gain them as they mature and demonstrate they can handle them.
How would you like this installed in your workplace?
Yes, because my workplace staffed entirely by people 21+ is the same thing as a school filled with literal children. Also, for some unknowable reason we don’t have issues with people vaping in the building despite having people that smoke and vape. Couldn’t possibly have anything to do with the fact none of us are teenagers.
What if [slippery slope]?
You do know that’s a fallacy, right?
… good?
Everyone (even kids) have a reasonable expectation of privacy, but children using drugs in school isn’t something that falls under that reasonable expectation of privacy.
I tried searching for “BSD memes” but all the results are for some cartoon by the same name.
Any work made to convey a concept and/or emotion can be art. I’d throw in “intent”, having “deeper meaning”, and the context of its creation to distinguish between an accounting spreadsheet and art.
The problem with AI “art” is it’s produced by something that isn’t sentient and is incapable of original thought. AI doesn’t understand intent, context, emotion, or even the most basic concepts behind the prompt or the end result. Its “art” is merely a mashup of ideas stolen from countless works of actual, original art run through an esoteric logic network.
AI can serve as a tool to create art of course, but the further removed from the process a human is the less the end result can truly be considered “art”.
“I don’t have anything to hide because I think I’ve done something wrong: I have something to hide because I question your judgement and motives.”
They’re fine giving you their info because they trust you. The problem is when the person seeking that information is untrustworthy – and some shithead(s) making their way into a company or government isn’t just possible, it’s likely.
Tell them to give all their sensitive personal information to someone that hates them. Credit card numbers, political beliefs, nudes, sexual preferences/fetishes, etc.
deleted by creator
Huh, they actually do:
And Matt Monson — who moved from the Dragon project to SpaceX’s satellite internet service Starlink — posted that Starlink uses a lot of application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs), and that they too have a lot of experience with Linux. “For some level of scope on Starlink, each launch of 60 satellites contains more than 4,000 Linux computers. The constellation has more than 30,000 Linux nodes (and more than 6,000 microcontrollers) in space right now.
https://thenewstack.io/the-hardware-and-software-used-in-space/
I don’t allow lunix in my house because it’s an illegal hacker operation system. I can’t believe an American hero like Elon would endorse something invented by the notorious Soviet computer hacker Linyos Torovoltos.
They almost certainly have in house legal teams and those lawyers are salaried.
Not really, unless the house was built incredibly cheaply with thin studs and crappy drywall.
Wood is pretty decent at blocking sound – it the voids between the studs that’s an issue. Filling them with sound deadening insulation solves that problem.
It’s not as good at blocking sound as a masonry wall obviously, but it’s “good enough” at a fraction of the price.
My toolbag calipers are cheap hardware store ones. They’re accurate enough and I’m not out much when they inevitably get damaged or lost.
You know it’s bad when you recognize the user name.
You can’t just mention D&D and Satanic Panic without sharing the Chick Tract.
You know you’re old when young people confidently explain to you things you witnessed first hand. Like Dee Snyder testifying in a Senate hearing.
Having read the paper, there seems to be a glaring problem: Even though the user can’t tell an attacker the password, nothing is stopping them from demonstrating the password. It doesn’t matter if it’s an interactive sequence – the user is going to remember enough detail to describe the “prompts”.
A rubber hose and a little time will get enough information to make a “close enough” mock-up of the password entry interface the trusted user can use to reveal the password.
There is a reason China has banned most US-based software in the mainland
I’m not at all saying what the USA is doing is right, but I find it hilarious Beijing is upset about it.
“It’s only OK when we do it!!!”
Also Disney once told a family no multiple times regarding putting Spider-Man on their dead child’s tombstone.
This is one of those situations where it’s better to ask forgiveness than permission. Even the most cold-hearted corporate ghoul is going to understand the cost/benefit of going after that family isn’t remotely worth it.
Yeah, the lawyers are going to say “no”. But even if they’re stupid enough to sue: some suit that isn’t a moron is going to tell them to drop it during the ensuing PR nightmare, and the family will be swimming in donations.
I didn’t disagree with that part. Doing what you suggested and using the “vape detectors” aren’t mutually exclusive.