Yeah, the privacy aspect of EFF doesn't align with social media in general IMHO.

Are they trying to "earn" some $ from social media? That's a silly goal, but might be a nice side benefit.

It's worse than that, because with proper skill, it isn't even a copy/pasta. It is one app that posts to everything all at once. Even the social media places that didn't make the list.

  Buffer, Hootsuite, Metricool, Robopost or Later ... just off the top of my head.

One could probably tweak posts for each platform with AI effectively.

Here is the list they are staying with ...

  Bluesky, Mastodon, LinkedIn, Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, YouTube

So, where did the audience go? It didn't go to the existing places from 20-8 years ago. And I doubt it went to the two new kids.

What this tells me is that their audience is aging/dying off, and the younger generations aren't there in numbers. This requires little to no political inferences to understand. It is easy to mistake one for the other.

Yes, I am a Boomer. I don't rely upon AI to tell me what to think. I am also a Libertarian and interested in Privacy and been a long time proponent of Open Source. Maybe figure out what intersections to the younger generations align and go there.

I'm not excited about lock-in but this method of identifying who is a "bad" company by their size seems petty and arbitrary. There are 15 companies in the world that have achieved a $1T market cap. Senator Weiner is saying in essence, "if you're not too big, your behavior can't be bad." And I disagree with that. A lot of tech companies are happily supporting this proposed law, not because they think the concept is just or good, but because it gives them a leg up temporarily. It's pure greed fighting greed, and in the end I predict nobody will be a winner but the lawyers.

Using AI is training AI to replace you. If you can be replaced with AI, you will be, and should be.

If you don't use AI, your peers will be, and you will be replaced by AI anyway.

Good Luck

Sounds like you understood their metaphor just fine. Nobody should be using those things for that activity.

Well said. Most people choose a neighborhood based on its characteristics. Is it close to downtown restaurants and shopping, or a quiet place where the kids can play safely? Is it close to work or a rural oasis? Is there adequate street parking for visitors, or do the neighbors block all the sidewalk with their many cars? Do you get a backyard and green space to relax? Does it have a neighborhood pool/gym/rec center; schools; parks? How do the neighbors maintain their yards: decent, amazing, messy...? And when they find the environment they like, and contract to spend a lot of money to live there, they are understandably upset if someone decides to overrule their environment with a new law or lifestyle.

I think the grandparent post awkwardly worded something that is accurate. I'm going to make up an imperfect example to illustrate what I think they meant. Suppose half the houses have one school-age kid, and schools cost $10k per student, all funded by property taxes. If houses are valued at $500K, your annual property tax rate is (10*0.5)/500 = 1% or $5K.

Now suppose instead that you still have a $500K home, but the 25 homes around you are half the size and just under half the price, $240K. Average house value is $250K, so property tax rate is (10*0.5)/250 = 2%. You now pay $10K in property tax, and all the other houses pay $4800. Services didn't change their price at all. So as a percentage of property values in a low-property-value area, they are a higher percentage. And since your house is no longer average price but expensive compared to others, your taxes are higher than others. I think that's what they meant to say in a much shorter form.

Lying to yourself is the biggest danger for trying to stay Anonymous. With enough patterns to recognize, the idea that one can hide is a delusional take.

The only way to win, is to run EVERYTHING you post through an AI that changes the tone and words used in all your online activity. But even then that may itself be a lie.

It's Not Enough to "Caution Against".

That language is TOO PASSIVE.

The correct and appropriate phrase is "HELL NO" and start tossing out 1st, 4th, 5th amendment claims IN COURT.

Oh -- thank you! I had not found that feature before, and now will go use it. I'm going to try to have everything I regularly use in one single window set, not split across a bunch of tabs.

Except that if I want my window at anything less than full screen, it decides which icons to hide. (Your view may be different.) So some of the functions I regularly use require me to change the display dimensions of Office. In the pre-ribbon days, I could put all my favorite icons to the left like Excel's Sort & Filter, and move to the far right the ones I rarely use like Excel's Conditional Formatting.

I read that and was simultaneously laughing and angry. I'd call it a load of horseshit, but that would be insulting to horseshit.

What a bunch of windbaggery. Meaningless, feckless corporate speak.

We know. They know we know. We know they know we know. They don't care.

Nothing says "fuck you" like a "well worded" press release. It was only missing the AI EM-DASH.

And the lucky landowner who sold has to move, because his neighbors all hate him now. A significant part of the value in rural life is your reputation and ability to call upon neighbors for help if/when disaster strikes. Anyone who sells to a datacenter is burning all that reputation. It's more expensive than the city slickers understand.

Climate is notoriously complex set of wild interactions that are unknown at best. Predictions of climate crisis have always been wildly off, because the goal is to scare people into action.

But the boy who cried wolf is a cautionary tale that climate people failed to learn.