And besides the major complications of just verifying it in the first place, try setting up your <13yo child to use their own Microsoft account just so they can play the Minecraft game they got, or use their own laptop. I had to basically yank my 10yo nephew out of his "family group" and lie to Microsoft about his age just so he wouldn't be constantly triggering "you're not authorized to use Chrome, let me ask your parents if you can use it for the next 2 hours" on his new laptop.

If there are going to be mandated controls over what kids can and cannot do based on their age, then the parents also need to be given extremely fine-grained controls over what they can and cannot do without constant approvals. I don't particularly have a problem with the mandated default being "no", as long as parents are presented with independently-verified information about the pros and cons of allowing access to X, Y, or Z before they enable access.

It also means that there must be useful and comprehensible audit logs of everything that happens with a child's account, and parents should have access to *all* of the child's data. I believe this is the case with FB Messenger for Kids, though I trust my child and the friends we've linked to him enough that I have not yet had to access it, though that may change in the future as he gets older.

But this is going to require a *major* restructuring of how all of these companies manage data, let alone access to various services.

One word: DeJoy.

Truer words were never spoken about the entirety of the cryptocurrency "market".

Seriously. The ads my son gets on his kid's games can be pretty inappropriate.

GStreamer is an entire ecosystem with literally thousands of plugins that can process a wide range of streaming information. The ffmpeg plugin to GStreamer happens to provide a means for processing most compressed audio, video, and container formats. Other plugins provide functions outside the scope of ffmpeg. There are nonlinear editing subsystems, video analytics, and many other capabilities. For an extreme example look at GstLAL, a set of plugins that process absurdly large amounts of data coming from sensors at LIGO, which was used to sift through the raw data to identify candidates for events that resulted in the Nobel Prize-winning detection of gravity waves. Yes, it's also used for realtime video streaming, such as the Japanese robot that flew on the ISS and used GStreamer to transmit teleoperation video. More pedestrian uses include basic video decoding, but because plugins have a well-defined API, in many cases GStreamer plugins are the only option available to perform hardware-assisted encode/decode/etc on a given embedded chip. Yes, you could use the ffmpeg plugin, but that only runs on the CPU, and major manufacturers (e.g. Texas Instruments, Rockchip, etc.) write all their own plugins to drive the silicon they produce.

FWIW I invented GStreamer in the first place.

https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/07/05/energy-output-is-over-100-times-the-input-needed-to-manufacture-solar-panels/

https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/8/23200153/solar-panel-value-recycling-renewable-energy

You could point an RPG at their face and it wouldn't "violate their community standards".

- somebody who's reported a lot of *blatantly* violating content

I have no idea how much power they might transmit on the upstream side, but I suspect it's well below anything an anti-radiation missile or even an ground-based radar would bother with. Visually they're not particularly different than any DirecTV-class dish, probably even easier to hide on a roof behind a parapet because they pretty much point straight up unlike geosync-pointed dishes. I don't think Russia is particularly going to be hunting Starlink terminals when as pointed out there are significantly bigger fish for them to blow up still.

Everybody seems to be operating under the concept that all of these vehicles are supposed to be replaced simultaneously, which is just plain absurd. The USPS has made vehicle transitions before, and they take many years to accomplish. As the article points out, the USPS based their reasoning on the laughable assumptions that gas, electric, and hardware prices will remain precisely where they're at right now. You're making the same assumption that both technology and the supply of materials to build that technology are going to remain precisely where they are at today, for the next 5+ years it's going to take to perform a transition.

There's also an assumption being made that the USPS is going to transition to ONE vehicle type, and that one vehicle can't possibly work in all cases. Of course there's no such thing, which is why we have different kinds of vehicles on the road. The majority of *vehicles* the USPS uses are in urban areas, where it's entirely practical for an modern EV to handle the driving loads. And if they can't, there's always charging during lunch.... Rural areas where a huge number of miles happen each day account for significantly fewer total vehicles, and unfortunately will probably be gas-powered for many decades to come.

https://www.engadget.com/2010-10-04-worlds-smallest-violin-uses-mems-plays-only-for-you-video.html

I run my primary account as a legacy free Google "Workspace", and am trying to figure out what I'm going to do, as I've got a bunch of family members also on the same domain. The promise of a single year of discounted rates does not really do anything for me except give me more time to transition completely away from Google.

The main problem I'm going to have in moving somewhere else is the fact that Gmail's spam filtering is pretty much bulletproof, and I don't expect to be able to replicate that anywhere else. I *might* be able to transition my data to a free account and simply set up an email forwarding server to bounce my domain back into those accounts, because it appears to be possible to change the From: address of any account so I can make it all behave as if the domain is still Gmail-hosted.

OTOH, if they would offer a transition from the legacy free Workspaces to a limited version that kept the domain association but otherwise restricted me to the services I can get for free from any other Google account, I'd be perfectly fine. The *only* feature of Workspaces that I use that is at all different from a standalone totally "free" account is the domain association.

Nevermind the fact that I can be absolutely sure that Google is making just as much indirect money off of my legacy Workspace account in the form of advertising and other datamining as they do off the equivalent free account, so the claim of extra costs is total BS. The one "extra" I use (domain mapping) *might* cost them a penny or two per year in extra CPU...

At least I have no "purchases" associated with my account, because I knew something exactly like this was going to happen ever since companies first started to let you "buy" content. They were *always* going to pull the rug, and I wasn't going to take the bait.

If it takes 8 minutes to redact a page, a single employee can put out 60 pages per 8-hour shift. At approximately 21.5 work days per average calendar month, that's 1290 pages per month for a single person. If they only have the 10 workers claimed, that's 12,900 pages per month. The assertion that they should only have to put out 500 per month is absurd, and the requirement of 55,000 per month is easily possible with the addition of 30ish more workers.

Of course, a flat 8 minutes per page is absurd considering the vast majority of the data is in formats other than a flat image of a piece of paper. The vast majority of the data in question is in some structured format or other which can easily be redacted using automated means. Put a week of work into proper redaction software and you could dump 100k's of pages in a few hours. The concept of somebody sitting there with a black pen marking out people's names is just ludicrous, but that's literally what they're talking about doing until the next century.

Amazing. Every word of what you just said.. was wrong.

<quote>It's so frustrating to see nerds of all people here on /. buying into this anti-intellectualism and disdain for people who have actually taken the time to learn about a subject...</quote>

I can't tell if you're lumping me in with that, but that wasn't my point at all. I am strongly in favor of regulators smacking down the greedy bullshit invented finance we keep seeing, and wish we'd pay more attention to well-structured regulations in general. Unfortunately our current batch of regulators are *not* doing this, and instead are happily allowing more and more indirect financial "instruments" to be created for the sole purpose of creating "wealth" instead of actual economic *value*.

I was just pointing out the epic irony of banking regulators who are deeply in bed with the major banks pointing out that the DeFi world is going to suffer from large consolidating players who don't care about anybody but themselves. They're absolutely right, but IMO in no position to be crying wolf because they *are* the wolf.

Trust me, I know waaaay too many anti-intellectual people who think experts are a scam and FB viral crap is the font of all knowledge, and it drives me batshit insane on a regular basis.

They say this like they aren't the "agents that play an important role" in traditional banking and/or they always prioritize the best interests of users of financial services.... LOL. Pot/kettle much?