I really don’t like that simply drawing a certain arrangement of lines and colors is now a crime

I’m sorry to break it to you, but this has been illegal for a long time and it doesn’t need to have anything to do with CSAM.

For instance, drawing certain copyrighted material in certain contexts can be illegal.

To go even further, numbers and maths can be illegal in the right circumstances. For instance, it may be illegal where you live to break the encryption of a certain file, depending on the file and encryption in question (e.g. DRM on copyrighted material). “Breaking the encryption of a file” essentially translates to “doing maths on a number” when you boil it down. That’s how you can end up with the concept of illegal numbers.

Google respects “before:2012” for now at least.

I would say no, ochre would have more of a red or orange-y tint.

I’m guessing he’s talking orchestral music with no lyrics. But “___ is not ideological” or “___ is not political” is exactly the sort of thing people say about stuff that is constantly political. It seems like he was just bought by Russia.

From the guys Wikipedia page:

“In 2024 Moosdorf accepted a part-time honorary professor position at Gnessin Russian Academy of Music in Moscow.

The school, financed by Russia’s culture ministry, made headlines just days after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, when a staff member performed a concert wearing a black sweatshirt with the letter “Z” on it, which symbolizes support for Moscow’s war.

“Music knows no ideological boundaries,” Moosdorf wrote on Facebook, adding that accepting the professorship is “a sign of understanding.”

“I want to give the young people there [in Russia] the feeling that they are not left behind in Europe,” Moosdorf said. He added that he spent three days in Moscow in September to give an inaugural lecture and plans to go back a few days every quarter to teach chamber music”

Seems like a reeeaaal nice guy huh /s

Billboards and other physical ads and such suck but are thankfully already mostly illegal where I live.

Problem with other kinds of advertising is that it can’t be made illegal, not truly. People would still do it, it would just not be marked as such. I’m not sure how to fix this.

but it doesn’t stop them from existing on the fediverse.

Well of course, nobody has absolute power over the fediverse like that. Anyone can start an instance and create millions of bot accounts if that’s what they wanted. But “the fediverse” is only what it looks like from the point of view of your instance. If stuff is blocked or defederated, it may as well not exist.

The point isn’t to eliminate all bad behavior on the fediverse (that’s not possible, by design of the system, and that’s good). The point is to allow users to seek towards those instances that keep bad behavior out.

You only need to stop it on your own instance. You can’t do anything else anyway. Users will go to the instances that aren’t flooded with bots.

Warcraft 3 custom maps still drag me back sometimes.

There’s nothing that can be done to stop it

That’s not true at all. You can definitely do something:

• Make a sign up process that filters out most low effort bots (e.g. applications, invite trees)
• Get more moderators to catch the bots earlier. In a similar vein, encourage users to report bots.
• Defederate from instances that don’t have similar measures, i.e. that don’t take bot prevention seriously.

It definitely does. You just defederate from the instances that don’t do something to avoid bots.

There are now, fortunately, plenty of low carb, low glycemic products that are a lifesaver when you have cravings.

What products are you thinking about?

That feels relatively young for something like that, I would’ve thought maybe that would’ve been a little further back.

In some ways it does go further back, because each village basically had its own time. So there were lots and lots of time zones, if you think about it that way.

No, that’s what I wrote as well. The identity service would not know what sites were visited or ideally not even how many sites were visited.

I’m not sure that is feasible, because in order to trust the answer, I feel the asker must know and trust the one providing the answer. It sounds like you’re imagining a system with many different ID providers? What prevents me from creating my own provider that just answers “Yes”, even for people under 18? If the site asking does not know it is my fake ID service providing the answer, I’m not sure they can trust any answer.

But I won’t pretend to be an expert on this topic, so perhaps it is feasible somehow.

In principle it should be possible to do a zero-knowledge proof.

This means that the website asking for age verification asks a yes/no question like “Is this user 18+?” and the age verification service (like a digital ID provided by the government or whatever) answers “yes” or “no” accordingly, but without telling anything else about the user. Also, the verification service should ideally not know who asked for the age verification.

So the site you want to visit only knows the thing they need to know: Whether you are 18+ or not. Nothing else. And the age verification service only knows somebody asked for age verification and provided the answer, but do not know which site you visited.

This is all possible, but I don’t have high hopes this is the intended implementation of any government seeking age verification, so don’t get your hopes up.

Never meet your heroes. Speaking from very literal experience regarding Stallman.

Tinnitus has no cure and is generally a permanent condition, so my guess is yes.

The video posted elsewhere in the thread explained it well

I don’t get 4 to 5