Given the numbers of times I've had to disable ad blocker to fix some janky page I have to use, I don't think installing an ad blocker without explaining or even mentioning it is a friendly act.
I mention it, they usually have no idea what I'm talking about sadly. I don't think ad-tech is a friendly act. Infact, I find it insulting, invasive, and completely violating what they do with the personal data when they sell it 6 ways to sunday, but enough about that.
Usually if I'm on somebody else's computer it's because they need me to fix things for them, or speed things up or 'make it better' which means it's getting adblock. The amount of modals and tricks and things they fall for especially my elderly neighbors or people wanting their business laptops setup especially Windows that have jank ass webpages that have the 'Download' link be some arbitrary .exe for something completely not what they wanted to download put something on their system is crazy.. hell even Youtube is giving people scams.
I just fixed some women's sobriety center's computer for free and their user account had some anti virus secure browser opening 20+ 'browsers' on boot for 'AG' free anti-virus.
Never had an issue with ublock breaking anything important for me. Air travel, hotels, ordering things online, if something says disable my adblocker I close it out and never go to that domain again.
To each their own though. I don't do ads though and will save every soul I can. Ad-tech is cyber terrorism at this point, and I stick to my guns.
Absolutely agree. I often disable my ad blocker/cookie blocker when I'm about to make a big purchase (e.g. airline tickets) in case they interrupt whatever crazy redirect flow the airline and their payment processor have.
I don't think it happened to me, but then I don't venture outside Amazon, Newegg.. major sites that much. But even then.. if they need all those crazy redirects, maybe they don't want my business.
If you ever limit the number of redirects to one in Firefox by using about:config, you'll see that most sites do at least two per page. It makes me wonder how many useless portals there actually are just because people glue together CDNs and add more off-site frameworks like Akamai and Typekit.
Allowing AI generated realistic CSAM while prohibiting real CSAM creates a real enforcement problem. Do prosecutors now need to find and identify depicted victims to prove a CSAM charge? Does believing material was AI generated serve as a defense?
We already have severe limitations on fictional depictions of this type of content so prosecuting AI depictions isn't anything particularly new.
> Do prosecutors now need to find and identify depicted victims to prove a CSAM charge?
Surely that would be a good thing if it incentivizes prosecutors to
track down the purveyors and distributors instead of just stopping
with easily targeted consumers. With nothing to establish beyond mere
possession, by some metrics their performance is optimized to the
contrary, much like the war on drugs.
> Does believing material was AI generated serve as a defense?
Believing that stolen property was legitimately acquired is a defense
against a charge of possession of stolen property, as is plausibly
claiming to have been set up. The alternative enables anyone with
physical access to cause anyone else to be guilty of a crime, surely
a net negative for society.
> We already have severe limitations on fictional depictions of this type of content so prosecuting AI depictions isn't anything particularly new.
Are you advocating its expansion to a general principle? Maybe Agatha Christie should
have faced charges for the crimes committed by her characters.
> Surely that would be a good thing if it incentivizes prosecutors to track down the purveyors and distributors instead of just stopping with easily targeted consumers
It would make it harder to prosecute purveyors and distributors. Arguing to some amorphous 'incentive' under some unnamed "metric" is silly since we have much better ways of creating incentives if you think the investigatory or prosecutorial priorties need to shift.
> The alternative enables anyone with physical access to cause anyone else to be guilty of a crime, surely a net negative for society.
No it doesn't as these defenses are unchanged.
> Are you advocating its expansion to a general principle? Maybe Agatha Christie should have faced charges for the crimes committed by her characters.
Work on your reading comprehension instead of making ridiculous claims. I'm not advocating anything. I am describing the current legal state in our country. If you are unfamiliar with the laws about creating fictional porngraphic material with underage characters, then google is your friend.
> ... becomes fraud when you start lying, even if your intentions are "good".
You have to prove they lied. I.e. that they knew they were defrauding customers, which goes to intent. Though I suppose it could be lying only later, in the cover up -- if Logan was stupid/lazy enough to trust dishonest people to build his game then deny or renege on refunds.
Regardless I imagine we'll find out soon as he sues CoffeeZilla since he may be countersued or be otherwise unmasked in discovery. CZ already has videos of Logan saying CZ is a stand up guy who does good reporting.
Roblox is a destable scummy company that depends on the exploitation of children to make money.
They took the exploitative practices of microtransaction based games, targeted them at children, then decided to use child labor to create content inside an expoitatively taxed monetization system, then decided to abdicate all their responsibility for responsible community management to protect these children by shutting down their own forums and pushing everything to Discord. Now we have children working for unvetted strangers with no labor protection and no oversight.
Agreed. And it goes beyond jaded monetization. A popular player and predator was only recently arrested after initiating physical contact with one of the child laborers. The game is simply not a safe environment for children.
Pedophilia & child-predation have been an open secret to anyone socially involved in ROBLOX for the longest time. The amount of random 18+ people interacting often and without guardrails with 13/14/15 year-olds is "normalized" to those in the communities.
The offline lookup is just for passwords (the pwned passwords service) and is used to prevent people from using known breached passwords.
There is no offline availability for the Have I Been Pwned data on which emails were present in which breaches. Access to thus data is rate limited and paid API keys are needed for bulk access.
> In my apartment, my deadbolt was so sticky that it was hard to turn even with the door half open. Two spritzes (keyhole and the bolt) with WD-40 classic, and it moved easily, and continued to turn easily for the remaining 6 months in my time there. Could lubricant-X have done a "better" job? Maybe, not that it mattered in practice.
It was likely the solvent properties of WD-40 that helped. It dissolved the old, tacky lubricant or rust and left you with a cleaner lock. For a six month fix on a rental, that is probably fine. For a long term fix on a house you own, it may be worth using one of a plethora of lubricants designed for that specific use case (including a more specific variant of WD-40 that is designed for locks and leave behind a dry lubricant when it evaporates.)
> Because now there's something that can also unstick your lock, but with an even lower coefficient of friction?
WD-40 is decent at removing rust, but not great at repelling water and thus preventing rust.
There are a lot of things that go into picking the right lubricant for a specific application. It isn't just "which lubricant is slipperiest?".
WD-40 is indeed a lubricant, but much of the benefits of using it are due to its solvent properties and people often don't understand that applying it in the wrong circumstances can lead to removing the correct lubricant and result in less lubrication.
