SeanDav

By all means argue with your boss, but:

Do it respectfully and accept the decision if it goes against your advice. Your boss is either aware of issues you are not, or might otherwise have good reasons. In any case there is very seldom 1 "best" solution to a problem.

If your boss is genuinely an idiot, then still accept the decision, but start looking for a new job or assignment to a different team.

OpenClaw. Vibe-coded and one of the most rapidly successful and popular pieces of software ever developed.

I am far more relaxed about the actual or potential use of AI to help with delivering an article. As long as the content is accurate, then why care?

There are several valid reasons why AI could have been used - e.g. For translation or in cases where someone might be a tech ace but struggle to write a well structured article.

This is not a forum for literature or poetry. As long as it is readable and accurate, that is what counts.

In any case the AI genie is out and is only going to get better, until it becomes almost impossible to distinguish from 100% human text. If we are going to try police everything we read, that will just become an exercise in frustration. There are bigger things in the world to worry about.

I would hardly define allowing your child access to the internet as neglect. Like anything else, like crossing the street for example, there are dangers that can be mitigated against by education by parents and schools.

The government is vastly overreaching in this and quite frankly if one argues that this is a good thing, then where to draw the line? Will we want to see government legislation for every possible permutation of potentially harmful behaviours or consequences.

Sorry Johnny can't come out to play because I have not yet bought the latest government-legislated knee guard armour to prevent a graze, and BTW I notice that you have not renewed the foam coating on your sidewalk, if Johnny trips and falls there...

It has always been the responsibility of parents to raise their children "properly" (whatever that means). What is special about internet access that now requires the government to legislate for it, and as a side-effect, greatly reduce the privacy of the rest of the population. This is without even addressing the argument that these measures may even make the privacy situation for children worse.

Humans are quite capable of bankrupting financial companies with coding issues. Knight Capital Group introduced a bug into their system while using high frequency trading software. 45 minutes later, they were effectively bankrupt.

This is likely the first step, and in itself is not much of a concern but only if it stops there, which it almost certainly will not. The next step, where the government argue that simple attestation is not secure enough to protect the children, and now we need to show a government ID is when the true damage starts.

This is a little like the joke: "Madam, would you sleep with me for 1 million dollars?", to which she replies "I would". "Madam, would you sleep with me for 1 dollar?", to which she replies, "Sir, what sort of woman do you think I am?" To which he replies "We have already established what sort of woman you are, now we are just trying to establish your price!"

By agreeing to this initial Age Verification, companies are establishing that they are willing to implement checks on age for their users, now we will see just how much more they are willing to do - all to protect the children of course.

This has got very little to do with children - that is just the excuse that sounds good. "Think of the children" is a rhetorical tactic that anyone who wants to get unfettered access to your data rolls out whenever they can. It is a tactic that unreasonable people use to influence reasonable people, because it is so difficult for a reasonable person to argue against without coming across as uncaring and/or bigoted.

Sure, for now... I simply don't believe it will stop at "simple attestation", because we all know that simple attestation is practically useless, but once the various distros accept this "trivial" inconvenience, "Age verification 2" with harsher requirements will soon be on the way.

I would be ecstatic to be proved wrong on this, but experience tells me that is not likely to happen.

Except compulsory age verification in Linux is now becoming a real threat. Some Linux distros are actively against this but many are not seemingly interested in fighting it: CachyOS, Ubuntu, Fedora and others.

Age Verification is the thin end of a much bigger wedge in "open" OS's

This is worrying on many levels. So Microsoft force you to create an account to use Windows and then they reserve the right to block you from your own account, thereby potentially making you lose access to all your OWN data. This is crazy and yet another reason to stop using Windows as soon as possible.

The earth was too scared to have him on it anymore...

With the increasingly intrusive legislated age verification and content monitoring being forced globally, I can easily see this as a catalyst to drive the Gemini protocol past critical mass.

I assumed that leap seconds could be determined algorithmically, it appears I assumed badly. This is a bit of a can of worms...