The cold heart fact is if your kid is the last one in the school to believe in Santa Claus, then you have totally, utterly failed as a parent, While the first kid in your kids class to not believe in Santa has parents that have been the most successful.

The cold, hard fact is only parents that want to brainwash their kids or keep them easily manipulated, only really care about this data. And so from a parent's perspective, you should be trying to train your kid to not believe in Santa Claus as early of an age as possible, to have the ability to think freely and shrug off such claims early, but because so many other things are contingent on the child believing in things are not real many parents falsely consider it a good thing that kids believe in Santa when the opposite is true and abusive parents will want their children to believe in Santa Claus simply because it makes either the parent feel good or in more control, or because they want their children to be easily susceptible to bad thinking and thus more easily manipulated and controlled by systems like the church. The fact is, the child is actually safer if it has the independent ability to shrug off such mental manipulation, But because that also makes the child more difficult to control, lazy. parents that are bad leaders will often succumb. to mental manipulation of this kind.

I do not think anybody has agreed to allow their underage children to be spied on in this way.

Amazon leadership may not agree with the law, but they need to disagree and commit to following it to protect children anyway.

It tries to force me to enable device history so they can use my voice for training the LLM if I try to use this; and if I refuse to turn it on, it won't let me actually use this feature.

So no, this is a privacy nightmare, it honestly looks to me like they are training deepfakes on the voices of everybody using it.

Web3 is a long form scam designed to trick people into joining a finance system that doesn't serve their best interests or protect them from scammers, while allowing Violent people who would otherwise be banned from the actual real world finance system due to anti-violence laws, to still take part in capitalism while still using violence to meet their ends. That is, in summary, The only reason Web3 exists is to allow violent criminals to have access to the financial system they would otherwise be banned from. It's not an upgrade, and it actually has less features than the typical real world finance system that it claims to be scared of.

You ever wonder why?

Web3 calls itself distributed. But the bank system is also distributed. The cold and hard truth is the reason the people shrill web3 is either because they have a lot of e-coins and are now trapped in that system and at risk of losing funds if they don't use it, so now they need to try to get value out of them, or they're just angry that a bank has the power to force a refund if a customer complaints about being scammed, sold a defective product, etc.

The fact is most of the people who got into web3 were the kind of people that wouldn't have legally been allowed to open a merchant account with a bank anyway. Or they never tried. Or they were too young to try. Or they had criminal records.

Web3 is not secure for the customer, as you can't force a chargeback if you get scammed. So it's not really that secure. That's also a big reason not to use it, compared to using the real financial system that has universally respected and supported all over the world.

The only reason I have heard people talk about liking Web3 is that it is designed to not allow people to do chargebacks, but that is a negative, so its doesn't serve the needs of the global finance system by default, because unless a customer can reliably dispute a bad transaction on their account when they get scammed or stolen from, then the system can have no legitimacy in the eyes of lawmakers or users who expect to be protected and consider this lack of feature to be a downgrade in their security.

Why? Because the expectation is that capitalism will work and protect you from violence by doing so; As in return for accepting the violence of a capitalistic system, The upgrade you're being sold is that you are giving up on the violence of physical violence being done to you an have chosen to negotiate and trade fir goods and services instead. That is why people chose capitalism, because it was better to trade with others than it was to go to war with them. We do capitalism because we are against physical violence.

So it really doesn't make sense to me to support web3, and allow people to do violence instead of being constrained to capitalistic systems, because web3 is a downgrade to our security and allows people to interact with capitalism and commerce while also skirting the laws around "no violence if you want to be a capitalist". Web3 is simply a back door to allow violence to take part in capitalism.

The people who support web 3 just want violence and chaos. They just want to be able to scam people and not allow them to seek refunds if things go wrong or not in their favor. As a customer, there is no reason for me to support web three or electronic currency because it doesn't give me the same freedom that a bank does; Its a downgrade and its less secure, by default.

So yeah, the Crypto crackdown will keep going, because the people who are doing it know how much they're protecting people by doing that. And so they're going to keep doing it until the job is done, just to protect people.

If you consider all of reality abstracted down to a wave function, what you're seeing is that when the black holes take over that way, that wave function reaches negative 100 and and that starts the explosion that we know as the big bang.

This repeats the cycle of universe construction, cooling, rest, formation, evolution, and eventually, destruction again. Just consider that entire cycle one simple iteration of this loop. Our reality and our entire species as humans will only exist for this one iteration of that loop. Out of the millions and billions that will happen.

Simply put, the entire existence of our universe is simply 1CPU cycle of the universe. And with every cycle that happens, we lose just a tiny bit of energy due to thermal loss. But the cycle still continues due to the amount of energy stored as a result. Every time that cycle happens, reality is destroyed again with a new big bang. It is a repeating cycle that eventually will end many, many, many, many eons from now after the energy is lost.

Not every human has the psychological strength to comprehend this fact. And so if you find yourself not wanting to read this, or this post makes you angry, understand this is normal, because it's your fear, your fear of the unknown, your fear of the end of existence, your fear that the universe will end, or restart, without you. And that's OK. We are small creatures, and we do not matter in the grand scheme of things.

But the fact that we can know about our small place in existence gives us something that many of these races that will exist and have existed as life has evolved repeatedly and died out on the universe never had; The comfort of knowing that this been going on for a very long time, and it will continue very long after us.

As much as people who support cryptocurrency don't want to hear this, the fact that Crypto currency cannot force a chargeback is the core issue that is making these regulators not trust.

A system that a customer cannot get help with when they have been scammed is not a secure system, and is not a system that can be considered trustworthy.

Electronic cryptocurrencies are not built to be secure or compliant with current finance law due to this gap.

As a result, it will be banned, and it will be regulated out of existence, because it has been designed from the ground up to not respect the current financial laws that mandate that chargebacks must be a part of the system, so it is illegal by default.

We already knew this was possible, and other people are currently working on this themselves publicly as open source projects. So why do we care that Google is doing this if they're not going to release it? Why is this even posted on slashdot?

I'll tell you why.

Because Google is scared, and this is a slashdotvertisment to help us all think that they haven't lost it, to tell us that they are working on it now and have done stuff so shouldn't discount them, its a fluff puce to make the stock not drop like a stone.

Literally nobody cares about this except Google and Google's trying to parade it as something that gives them value to us while refusing to give us the actual value. As a result, this advertisement on slash dot does nothing but tell us the users that Google is behind.

This law is anti-free speech and simply seeks to take away rights from people writing open source software, Under the false statement of securing the supply chain that already uses these as critical parts of its operations.

It intentionally wants to increase the cost and burden of startups in order to make them intentionally more non competitive with entrenched providers.

This law is being promoted by people who are simply not wanting others to compete with them, and it will kill the UK's ability to maintain its technology sector.

The new design makes it actively less accessible for people with vision issues. And it's so much brighter than it used to be, which makes it harder to use and more painful on the eyes. I really wish they had just released dark mode for not-logged-in Wikipedia instead, because that's all we really want.

You cat legally tell me that I'm not allowed to do with what I own.

And if you sold something to somebody else under specific terms, as soon as they sell it to me, I no longer have to deal with your bs.

I own the property, I control how its used. That's the law.

That's why Elon is allowed to destroy twitter, he got debt financing and paid for it. Everybody had plans and goals for it, but he is the owner now. If that's ok, then its the same thing.

>> Data please, and as a overall whole not just one cherry picked industry

How about you prove the inverse for me to take your initial claim seriously? What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence, respectfully. Your saying that RTO improves productivity and quality of life for the employee, so prove it. Because Harvard studies proved otherwise, google it.

>> Oh ...

Approximately about N%, where N is equal to a dynamic value of the type that if I had been entrusted with it, I would also have enough respect not to disclose it, as that's sensitive HR data and I would not want be the dumb person who leaked that as in many states that would be a crime and would probably get you canceled at work by HR pretty fast.

But that's not true.

And many of these people only accepted job offers due to it being fully remote; so this is labor fraud to a lot of angry people.

Nope, they only proved that single device could.

It was an outlier that was more safe than expected, is all. The real trouble is all the other devices, right?

What makes these faster chips illegal? Are they literally saying "you cant do math over this speed" in the law?