Trailblazing Braille Taser

It doesn’t make very much sense if you’re not a racist, and yet…

Maybe scaretors or fearmongers… oh, I know, horrorists!

Ok, fine, 33 bits 😂 Wikipedia says the world population is 8 billion, and python tells me that math.log2(8e9) is 32.897.

Remember, kids, it only takes 32 bits to uniquely identify any person on the planet. That’s 32 yes or no questions. Of course, they have to be perfectly crafted questions, but identifying power of fingerprinting must not be underestimated.

I mean, it’s possible that the software bug happened organically, but certainly at some point in the last decade management must have heard about it.

I’m honestly not sure what you’re saying. Countries like the US with poor public transit infrastructure think alcoholism is serious solely because of people who drink and drive?

Stupid question probably, but what’s stopping actual criminals from putting a bright orange tip on their real guns so they won’t get shot by cops? Pride?

Oh, this’ll blow your mind. Digital cameras don’t capture the entire image all at once. They typically capture one row of pixels at a time, so each row comes from a different moment in time.

So the point I was alluding to is that two adjacent frames in a video carry slightly more timing information than they might appear to based on timestamps.

Specifically, if you have two frames where a dot appears at the bottom and then a second dot appears at the top, you can’t be 100% certain that the first dot to appear actually showed up first, or whether it’s an artifact of the rolling shutter effect.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_shutter

Jeez, I wonder if they accounted for the rolling shutter to get higher time resolution

If the video was 30 fps, sounds like two frames

Thankfully he was born in South Africa.

The darned neural implant generation doesn’t even know how to doomscroll with their fingers. Kids these days smh no cap.

I was thinking mowing at night is the worst time because the morning dew would promote mold growth while the blades of grass are most damaged. But I’m just making shit up.

The classical options are that the world will end in the future, is currently ending, or ended in the past. Today, I’m here to tell you that there is another option: the world never even existed. Poof!

I think the judge would know it when they see it and laugh them out of the court room.

This is like comparing paintings to the Mona Lisa. Shrek is the crowning achievement of our civilization.

Great question. I don’t know.

I think most would agree though, that the absence of a good solution does not justify a poor solution.

I guess that anyone in the country who seeks out and obtains the illegal content is committing a crime, so the government could go after them through traditional means. (Although seriously, are we really going to punish regular people for accessing a social media site?)

Admittedly, banning an entire website at the ISP is far more effective. However, I’d argue it’s effective in the same way that a cannonball is an effective flyswatter.

All countries have internet censorship.

Agreed.

If your issue is with what is being labeled illegal you need to focus on that.

My issue is not with any content being labeled illegal. I don’t like the government enacting censorship by ordering ISPs to block certain traffic.

I think that Brazil is within their rights to seize property or assets of entities engaging in illegal activity.

It’s the sort of asymmetric power that concerns me, because by ordering the ISPs around, they can block the entire country’s access to information with the flick of a switch. I don’t want my government getting too comfortable with this kind of power because I don’t know who will wield it next year.

I think ISPs should be dumb pipes. They should not be responsible for censoring content. They shouldn’t even know what they’re transporting, ideally.

However, what is happening with Twitter and Brazil isn’t censorship

The Brazilian government is forcing an ISP to block customers’ access to a specific website. Whether it’s right or wrong is up for discussion, but I can’t accept the claim that this is not censorship.

I feel pretty conflicted on this whole thing. Don’t get me wrong, it’s hilarious seeing Elon squirm, but it’s disconcerting to see everyone cheering on government censorship of the internet.