I think what he meant to say, is that if Lewinsky had been a decade younger (12 instead of 22), then nothing would have happened.

This mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it.

You don't get to pick and choose what people post (with some obvious exceptions like fraud or csam), while also claiming immunity for the stuff you couldn't or wouldn't.

Exactly, thanks for the excellent example. That's the kind of statement that nobody ever explains, but always presents as pure axiomatic dogma.

I do think that you might have revealed a clue in your unusual phrasing, though. You said "claiming immunity for the stuff you couldn't or wouldn't" but how can there ever be any possibility of liability there? If your computer denies someone else's request to publish something, what liability is there to be immune from?

Just reading that - "ChatGPT's Erotic Mode" - felt slimy and gross.

Yeah, what kind of idiot would think of using the internet to make money on porn?

This is another 404 Media pay-for-placement post here on Slashdot. They're pretty much all low-quality hide-your-blogpost-behind-a-paywall drivel.

I think one of the problems Asahi runs into is that macOS can already be used for almost everything a Linux box can be used for - so it's harder to get excited about working on it.

My work-provided laptop is an M3 MacBook Air. I use it to admin ~ 100 Linux servers and workstations, and I can't say I've yet run into a situation where I said "darn it, that apparently doesn't work on a Mac". There are some command-line switches that are different between the two, but I think that mostly comes down to the difference between BSD vs. Mac. And I can (and do) install the Gnu tools.

The families of the dead servicemen and servicewomen are certainly crying, although if you asked them I don't know that they'd mention "winning" as a reason for it.

I tried to save money once by having a laptop delivered via UDP... let's just say it didn't end well.

are automakers responsible when someone breaks the speed limit and kills someone?

What's funny is that there's no such thing as "vicarious speeding" or "contributory reckless driving," but with copyright, there is. Analogously, sometimes the automaker is liable for drivers speeding!

But even so, Cox's behavior didn't fit contributory infringement.

The court just said T17 S501 is an ok law that they're not striking it down or anything like that, but it doesn't apply to this case!

A very good thing has happened.

The people who say that, never supply a reason. It's just dogma.

My counter-dogma: nuh uh.

I have heard Colbert talk about the LOTR universe before, and I swear he has even the hundreds of pages of those LOTR appendices memorized (if you've got the books, you know what I'm referring to). He really is a Tolkien super-fanboy.

It's illegal but laws aren't currently enforced, so I don't know why you're bringing the law up.

Let's perform a natural experiment: keep saying reappropriation is illegal, and then wait for the executive to do it anyway. Then watch to see if Congress gives a fuck, by impeaching the executive (or credibly threatening to impeach if the embezzled funds aren't returned in n hours).

My hypothesis is that Congress won't do anything about it, and is fine with whatever new powers that the president decides he wants.

What's your hypothesis?

Surprise: we're actually going to do that experiment. In fact, we started it last year.

It's not in society's interests, but it is in government's interests. Society and government are orthogonal teams who often conflict with each other. In the US, we spelled that out explicitly in the late 1700s, but docs go back at least as far as the Magna Carta.

Alas, "spelling out" government limitations isn't the same thing as believing limits are a good idea and enforcing them, as we're occasionally reminded. The Constitution is just ink on a page, until people give a fuck about it. And in America, the constitution is currently very unpopular. Society wants to surrender to government, or if it doesn't want that, it's sure acting like it wants that.

That's pretty neat!

The danger with using unallocated space, is that sometimes you might accidentally overwrite it. But if that happens, I guess it just means you need to figure out what your new size needs to be, make a new hidden volume, and then restore from backup. It's that last step that I never remember as a possibility, probably due to my horrible backup habits. ;-)