Formerly /u/Zagorath on the alien site.
Cool. I stopped paying for it back when it was still called “YouTube Red”, during one of their many crackdowns on creators’ freedom in the name of benefitting advertisers. I dumped it and installed an adblocker, and eventually YouTube Vanced and its successor Revanced.
I worry about this sometimes. I don’t ever want to be seen as speaking “for” minorities I’m not a member of, but I do want to be seen speaking “up for” them. And I worry about finding the right balance. I don’t want to speak over them, but do want to help make it clear that I support them and I am opposed to those who are opposed to them. I don’t want to be MLK’s “white moderate”.
It’s not true.
But if it was, it wouldn’t be a reason to dislike Postgres. Academic AI research in the '90s is a far cry from commercial AI companies today.
What’s the reference here?
Honestly, that is how I would prefer it be done. But it isn’t what OP asked for.
It would have to be set at an operating system level, with the OS providing an API for the browser to use, while the os itself restricts installation of unapproved apps (and to work, installation of apps would have to use an allow-list or a similar age-tagging system, where any app that includes general web access has to be 18+ unless it also implements age-gating correctly).
But yes, this would be the best system. Parental controls have never been very successful in the past, but I think part of the reason for this is that they’ve never been properly supported up and down the stack. The government should mandate that it is supported the whole way, so that parents really have the tools they need to enforce parental controls.
Edit: I thought this was a comment in another thread. My reply here only makes sense in that context.
Insomnia > Postman.
I switched to Insomnia around 2021 when Postman started enshittifying and found I liked it a lot more. Insomnia has also been relatively enshittified unfortunately, but it feels like it’s to a lesser extent.
it has been a rethorical one trying do point out the case of US-defaultism
No, I understood that. My reply was meant to be read as a rebuke to that idea. Because it isn’t an American day. It’s less observed in America than it is in many other countries. Claiming it to be US-defaultism relied on a mistaken assumption that because some Americans are talking about it, it must be a uniquely American thing.
Ironically, your complaint about “US-defaultism” was itself the US-defaultism.
In the OS is where it belongs. But not like this.
Parental controls is the answer. The OS should be required to support robust APIs that allow parents to set the age of their child and prevent children from accessing apps or sites (via browser APIs that hook into the OS APIs) that are out of the age range. The only actual “verification” should be parents choosing to type in the number.
And what does this strange word “international” mean???
It means international. As in it’s an official holiday in a bunch of countries, and unofficially observed to one degree or another in a whole heap more.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Women’s_Day
(Note: disregard the map shown on this page. It’s unsourced and does not match the article’s text.)
Worth noting that Lemmy receives at least some institutional funding for its development. And I believe some of that funding is contingent on hitting active user goals or similar metrics.
Often, but not always, yes. If the misunderstanding is reasonable and they had ample opportunity for an explanation but didn’t, then yes, it’s an idiot plot.
If they legitimately didn’t have an opportunity to explain, or the explanation, while true, was completely unbelievable, that’s not an idiot plot IMO.
Yes, they have two options. Either honour the sticker price, or stop selling it at all until the price is fixed.
In Australia if the price at the checkout is higher than the price tag you are entitled to the first item free
Got a source on that? That’s not what the ACCC says.
They would have to refuse to sell to anyone. It would likely not be lawful to leave it on the shelf and sell it at the higher price to someone else who might not have noticed the discrepancy, until they fix up the shelf pricing.
Australia, the country the article is talking about. That was a quote from the ACCC website.
Reminder that by law, if the price is listed wrong:
Sometimes the price of an item in store or online at the checkout may not match the displayed or advertised price in store or online. If this happens, even by mistake, the business must either:
- sell the product for the lowest price - either the checkout price, or displayed or advertised price, or
- stop selling the item until the incorrect price is corrected.
Relevant username, I guess.
You can’t evolve out of a clade.