Doublepost, but I had a compulsive urge to point out how weird it is to speak in future tense in reference to a past event.

Of course it's a point-defense system. Did you think it was a patent on an actual force-field generator? Don't be ridiculous.

Because some patent squatter will have that already.

I think I've seen one of his comics get linked once.

Or twice.

...Daily. In every tech site's discussions.

BUT SERIOUSLY GUYS PASSWORD REUSE EVERYONE NEEDS A THROWAWAY TIER

This is actually the angle I predict. Not just an alleged techguy, but deliberately assembling conditions such that "I don't have access to the key even if I wanted to.", kind of like breaking up a key into parts and splitting them among your lieutenants or minions or whatever.

We've been able to build workaround canaries and deadman switches with little tech, at this stage we can probably set conditions such that "I can't procure the key even under duress, an unknown third party/system has to re-equip me and will observe me first."

Compared to hearing "You will reported to the Ministry of Love for patriotic rehabilitation." I'll take a trolling any day.

Either you're "with us"*...

...or you're a pedorist drug dealer.

*OBEY

>Whatever is in general use in a language is for that reason grammatically correct.

THEN IF IT WASN'T IN GENERAL USE IT WAS FUCKING WRONG

"Incorrect", "Improper", whatever.

I'm also looking at you, UD.

Not yet. In my dictionary, protolife (read, pre-life) is self-replicating assemblies, including prions but also tin pest and even fire. Any construct that has that seemingly self-preserving reproduction, which inadvertently causes population and sustained presence, the scoreboard of something well-evolved and adapted.

However, only protolife with variance can evolve. I'm not sure it's exhaustively impossible to see tin pest change: Consider some kind of unusual variant or alloy that is less susceptible to being eroded by water, and more importantly, populates as much and as often and either it reaches nearby environments or it is a "mutation" of some noticeable frequency. Some, most, or all tin pest would be of this variety. And yet ultimately, like GP said, this lacks real mutation, the chain of possibilities isn't there. It only coincides with sustained presence.

GP's prion is some kind of brown goo scenario, but it seems like it leans on an abundance of inert proteins, or protobiosphere. I still lean towards this endpoint because of increased variant options over tin by sheer chemistry, because "more stable" variants will probably be (inadvertently) leveraging properties that are more True Scotsman "life", like incidental locomotion. Or maybe they clump. Or, hell, I don't know, because disclaimer: I'm speculating out my ass and don't know shit about the subject.

So what happens if I post a list here, UK ISPs block slashdot?

"Treating the symptom" is often considered a poor use of resources. And whack-a-mole doesn't even accomplish that. What's worse than "poor"?

> Even if it were [moral], there would be technical challenges
Ha ha oh wow. Since when did this ever start showing up in statements? Last I checked we still have people (from plebs to politicians) saying crap like "We should show everyone's name on the internets!"

And even multi-million corporates saying crap like "Let's base policy around the user's location because we can tell where they are." Then some tech says something about "proxies and VPNs" and the decision makers say something about "Fix it. We'll sue. We'll lobby it into illegal. Do something."

You don't have to know tech, just know that things like "the (federal) LEOs can look the guy up" and "they can be controlled through their ISP" are not hard rules. That there are few hard limits to internet use at all. You can do whatever you want case-to-case but it's different when you try to declare encompassing laws. You don't have to know tech, just look at restrictive countries. You can control most people most of the time (techwise) but don't assume that's a reflection of your power, it reflects people using tech the easy (insecure) way.

Hopefully we'll dodge more bullets in the future. I'm glad we didn't set the wrong precedent on "an IP address is useful evidence but can not be equated to an individual".

It's somewhat more dystopian if you're trapped in the walled garden and coughing up yet again for even more overpriced stuff (read, adapters) just to interface with the rest of the planet's devices. Generation after generation.

But even then, they're obviously able to afford form over function. First world problem indeed.

Everyone knows which one that is without even clicking. The context tends to be relevant pretty often.

More importantly, "We need to develop [a] universal" is a cute coincidence of words - we already have exactly that. Granted, it'll never be perfect ubiquity, and we still need adapters even from one USB to another...

...but at least engineers now know what the correct choice for "a universal interface port" on the side of a laptop is, and when someone says "Do you have a phone charger lying around?" there's a best-response.

A1 doesn't empower you to commit illegal acts via speech/opinion. Like endangering human lives.

Those aren't being censored. FoS doesn't override property laws, or laws against endangering human life.

FoS doesn't override anything. It means you won't be censored, is all.

If you'll excuse me, someone somewhere is dropping the "shouting FIRE in a theater" line (which is prohibited-but-not-censored for endangering human life)

Your physique may vary, but somewhere around six or seven simultaneous bodies the diminishing returns will outpace the gains of adding more females to my equation. Most of us can probably raise that intersecting point with a controlled diet and exercise regime. The frail or elderly may have to settle for "two girls at the same time."