rangerelf

To be fair the club is pretty small, I'm pretty sure they keep in touch.

(24 hours later...)

Are you really splitting hairs about this? Does it matter if it was 20 minutes and not 30? Does that exculpate them for bombing a school?

I find your line of questions repugnant, in the sense that it would seem you're examining it from every angle possible to find one tiny weakness that could help you dismantle the simple fact that they bombed a school full of children.

You don't need an account to browse the steam store, you need one to verify you're a user before downloading/installing a game, or (obviously) buying a game.

> Are you worried Android is going to lose power users to iPhone? What are the alternative shops you're referring to here? We're not buying pastries.

Are you 13 years old? Who in their right mind would even care that "all the power users" went and bought iPhones? Are thoughts like this keeping you up at night?

> I don't know if people's imaginations are lacking here, but there could easily be a world in which your 'alternative' verifier would still make you wait 24h (or longer).

It's your imagination that's failing; we don't want ANY verifier at all, whatsoever. Nobody should be able to reach into my phone OS and have a say regarding what I can install or not.

> The wait is clearly a security mechanism, regardless of who makes you do it.

"Security mechanism" to protect WHO from WHAT, exactly? And please don't repeat the drivel about scams that Google's pushing, we all know those are excuses, "It's for the CHILDREEEENNNN!!!!" sure.

> or is your actual problem the identity of the entity making you do it, or is your actual problem that the power is too concentrated in one entity, regardless of the entity? These are very different issues with very different solutions.

So you DO know what's going on! In that case I have no idea why you're arguing in favor of having a gate placed in front of our [personal, owned] phones to regulate what we do with our own devices.

No, you can't; not without jumping through hoops, not without clicking on fake warnings, not without a song and a dance about fake "saving you from scammers" scare tactics.

Please stop covering for Google. They're behaving badly, people are reacting, stop with the "Achucally..." which is pretty grating and cringe worthy.

I get where you're coming from ivenjermakov, but the root cause of why we have a Linux, why Unix even existed, why Woz & Jobs created Apple, and so forth, is because creative, smart people want to break the hold of "common stuff".

Not to diss you, but these kind of questions ("Why another distro?", "Why another language?", "Why another ssh server/client/framework"? and so forth) have been asked zillions of times already, and the answer is always the same: the current offerings were not enough, for whatever definition of "enough" was at the time, and those offerings were tied down by whatever social structure or framework that did not work for these creative folks. I love that we have the freedom to explore with technology in the way we do.

We're just not at that stage yet, but we're getting there.

It's already a crime (in the books) to drive out of several red states for women's health care reasons, and they'll follow you on flock if they can.

Mark Bray had his and his family's airline tickets to Spain out of Newark "mysteriously cancelled" while in line after checking in their baggage.

You'd be surprised.

I also do find americans to be utterly naive regarding this slide towards fascism, and I live here so don't bother trying to explain it to me.

You only saw the end result regarding the "universe as what the Stasi was doing", obviously you didn't pay attention to the road getting there.

You're mistaken; in my family _everyone_ has heard of and read about the "creepo glasses" and that they're associated with Facebook, and want absolutely nothing to do with them or anybody who would voluntarily wear them. Plus, they have zero problem telling anyone wearing those glasses around them to either take them off or leave.

Yes, I would consider that "massive" since none of them are HN readers nor work in any tech or media related fields.

You're arguing really really hard in favor of Meta Raybans, even to the point of coming up with excuses and false analogies. It's almost like you're arguing in bad faith and claiming ignorance of Meta's bad faith implementation of all the surveillance features they've been pushing.

Why?

Given Meta's history of disregarding everyone who's not Zuck (and him being a sociopath), why give them the benefit of any kind of doubt? Right now, everyone should assume malice as the first explanation, and then accept that maybe there was some ineptitude once evidence appears.

That's exactly what jonhohle was talking about -_-

llama-server from the llama.cpp package has a local web interface.