So in summary, you understand that two different users should see two different things. But that should not be allowed because you do thing differently. Everyone must do it the way you do it. So we are back to the main problem: Your lack of seeing another person's perspective. I should just type in "Unavailable" for every time I am off. No one should type in the reason they are out so they can keep track of why they were out or plan why they will be out.

I love a term a friend of mine used to use when talking about AI: "Narrowly superhuman" (before "superintelligence" got to be a thing).

AI is narrowly superhuman. It is able to do specific things that used to be defined as a "hallmark of intelligence" much better than a human. The easiest one? Summing numbers. It's both faster and more precise than a human.

AI gets more and more such areas it can do better than a human.

If we define "Superintelligent" to be "A computer system able to do absolutely everything we can somehow call intelligence better than any human", we will *never* have superintelligence. The things we define as intelligence will be in conflict; we'll land at the system being better at one at the cost of another.

I'm in favor with being careful about this development. But "prohibiting the development of superintelligence" isn't an option. It's already here.

Dividing the yearly US spend on Internet advertising by the number of people in the US that has Internet access gives $900-$970 spend per person per year, or $75-$81 per month.

Please choose the option you want:

1. I want to pay about $75 per month per member in my family into the ad auctions to not see any ads. Ie, keep the infrastructure, but let you opt to pay your share through money rather than attention.
2. I want to prohibit ads, and accept that everybody will have to pay for the sites they want access to, that there will be much fewer services, that there will be much higher transaction costs, and that the poor will have much less ability to access services. (Microtransactions won't solve this, due to the need for trust evaluation of same.)
3. I want some combination of 1 and 2, where some sides of ads are prohibited so it is possible to buy my way out of them at a lower price,. I accept that this will result in the loss of some services and lower access to others for the poor.
4. I want legislation that makes Internet ad blockers work more consistently. I accept that this just shifts the attention cost to other people, and have me getting the benefit without paying the cost.
5. I want to remove Internet ads and subsidize the sites through taxes.
6. I want to increase the requirements of Trust and Safety checks and format restrictions for ads, potentially accepting higher overhead (in what goes to content vs infrastructure) for less annoying/bad ads. I accept that doing this creates significant advantages of scale for ad networks.
7. Other, please describe, including where costs gets shifted with your proposal.

The above are my best attempt at listing possible options and their correct caveats. In most situations, I find ads annoying (who doesn't). Unfortunately, they are the main money highway of Internet content.

DISCLOSURE: I used to work for Google, where I rang infrastructure for stopping bad ads/advertisers and for removing fake clicks. I've also been interested at the use of sub-cent microtransactions to pay for content since the 1990s, though I've become disillusioned as I've learned more about the attention economics involved. Approving individual microtransactions has a higher attention cost than dealing with the ads, and bulking them per-site (through micro-subscriptions) will limit the number of sites that can have content.

Let me explain this slowly to you as you do not seem to understand. In my calendar I have listed the exact reason why I am not available. It could be "Surgery" It could be "Playing video games". It could be "Out" NO ONE SHOULD SEE WHY I AM UNAVAILABLE BUT ME. Why is that so hard for you to understand? Do you even work an office? Everyone I work with has the same setting. I don't know WHY they are out. They know.

I should see the reason, not you. Are you so dense you do not understand that two users should see two different things DUE TO SECURITY? It should not matter to you why I am out. It only matters to me.

WTF are you talking about? If I have a medical procedure, it does not necessarily mean I am in the hospital. It means I am not available for work. I could be home the entire time after the surgery.

I would think someone in Europe would understand privacy, but alas no.

Again you seem not to be able to see someone else's perspective. Do you even work in an office? Every calendar app I use shows "Unavailable" to you but shows me WHATEVER REASON I typed in to keep track of why I was out.

The Car and Driver numbers are for he US only. The GP's list is based global sales. Still, the Model Y is only the best-selling EV in the US, and not the best-selling car in the world by any measure.

And yet you continue to insist no one does that while claiming you were misread.

For a second there, I thought you realized you are not the entire world. It was a fleeting moment.

Again I have to assume you have never worked in an office with people such that you have to let people know what days/times you are not available. Again I provided examples: a coworker is out on maternity leave. She has blocked off all the days she is gone. I had a medical procedure and was out a few days.

So you finally realized the world is not you.

Again, how would you know unless you have access to everyone's calendar?

1) You said no one uses or has a calendar. That's entirely different than no one can see your calendar. Why would you lie? 2) My entire point was no one should be able to see your calendar. What part of that was unclear to you?

And you know this, how? Do you have access to everyone's calendar?

In the case of surgery, you mean besides to remind people I work with that I'm having surgery so I will be out for X number of days? In the case of maternity leave, I have a coworker that I do not interact with on a daily basis. She's out on maternity leave but I don't know when she started or when she gets back. Guess what scheduling a meeting tell would tell me: She's out until [date].

In what world do you live in? I have 2 calendars: Outlook and Zoom. How do people at your work schedule meetings again? Telepathy? Text messages?

What does a cashier have to do with Amazon again? You do understand Amazon has office workers right?

Let me see if I understand you correctly: According to you no one uses a calendar even though I have 2 of them to keep track of meetings. No one blocks off time in their calendar so that people know not to schedule a meeting or that someone is unavailable. Do you actually work in an office because it seems like you do not.

You are entirely correct. I took another look at what the law actually required and I am definitely crying wolf (at this point). Thanks for taking the time to point this out to me.

There is definitely a slippery slope there, but I agree with you, California is far enough away from the event horizon of that slope that my histrionics are not warranted. Not only that, but the carve out for Linux actually is helpful. Thanks once again.

In your world people just take time off medical leave without reasons?

They are not supposed to be visible which is the point you are missing.

Good for you?

And here is the crux of the problem: You do not represent everyone but somehow think you do.

More than likely it is a clickbait title. After all, there are many "shocking" things that “companies don't want you to know" that will "change the world."

Probably the same as Dell, HP, Lenovo, and Samsung products. Probably in the same factories that made Apple products.

So just like Dell, HP, etc.

The companies in question are going to get in serious legal trouble if they fail to comply in verifying the ages of their users. Microsoft, Google, and Apple are all going to give these companies an API that will move that burden from themselves to the makers of the operating system. Discord, to use an example, will be able to say that they asked Microsoft, Google, and Apple to verify ages, and then that they relied on the information that they were given. What's more these companies actually want to know the age of their users. This information is valuable, and they will be able to use it to target their customers with advertising.

What's more, every bad actor is going to try and target this exception. Linux traffic will end up in the same bucket as bots, predators, and any other malicious traffic. There is nothing in the current exception that requires companies to work with Free Software. My guess is that if your operating system can't do age verification that is blessed by Microsoft, Google, or Apple that most sites will simply block your traffic.

This is going to end up being a huge step backwards for Free Software clients.

Sounds like you're trying to fit a square peg in a round hole and blame Apple for that. First of all, for AI work, why aren't you using the Apple Neural Engine that has existed since the M1. Second, you can get external GPUs if you wanted. But again neither the Mac Mini nor the iMac explicitly designed for the task you want. I don't complain a Toyota Prius can't move large pieces of furniture.

Social media sites are going to get in trouble if they can't verify ages, and they want the age information so that they can sell it to advertisers. Microsoft, Apple, and Google are going to create APIs that the various services are going to trust. If your alternative implementation of the API response isn't signed by a key controlled by Microsoft, Apple, or Google it will be blocked outright. This loophole is not a victory, it is a huge defeat.

These operations can get in actual legal trouble if they don't gather this information. Plus, it is in their best interests financially to gather this information. Verified age information is ridiculously valuable to them. They want to be able to get your verified age, and now they have a legal reason to require it. Plus, every bot, actual predator, and other bad actor is going to try and climb through this Free Software exemption. The overwhelming majority of traffic that can't provide a response signed with a key by Microsoft, Apple, or Google is going to be crap, pure and simple. This law doesn't say anything about requiring that the service work with Free Software. Instead it puts Free Software in its own little ghetto. One thing is certain about ghettos, they don't put you in a ghetto for any reason but to be able to discriminate against you.

It is far more likely that a year from now Linux will be unusable for sites that require age verification, than it is that Linux will be the loophole that websites allow ti work despite not having "certified" age verification. Microsoft, Apple, and Google didn't fight this because they know that this actually strengthens their grip on operating systems. From now on, any device created by people that want to potentially do business in California (ie, everyone), is going to have to find a way to get a "blessed" age verification API by one of the big three. If they can't get that blessing then their fancy new device is unlikely to work on any service that has personalized accounts.