Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)S
Posts
1
Comments
92
Joined
3 yr. ago

  • The Delegated Act I found says the exception is for

    (a) appliances, including wearable devices, specifically designed to operate primarily in an environment that is regularly subject to splashing water, water streams or water immersion, and that are intended to be washable or rinseable

    So I don’t think it applies to mobile phones. Or did it get changed again?

  • And don’t tell me it’s because you copy pasted the title of the source article or something.

    Well yeah, it’s usually good practice not to change the source article’s title.

    Do I think the “black communities” part was necessary in the title? Not really. But if the author decided to frame it like that, and OP wanted to repost it as-is, I see no issue with that.

  • Just have glasses with clear visual (possibly even auditory) indicators that they’re recording, and store the footage in an SD card, easy. Of course though, they won’t sell nearly as much because people won’t be able to use them to showcase le epic pickup skillz.

  • They are not used for good. Pretty sure it’s been proven a lot of individuals that have access to the footage disproportionately search through the database, likely not for law enforcement reasons.

  • Did you mean “despise”? …though in hindsight, “dispose” would probably be better

  • Erm, ackshually, Rule 34 is “if it exists, there is porn of it”.

    Which means somewhere, there’s pics OF sexy anthropomorphic meta glasses. Maybe not even anthropomorphic.

  • Eh, even the guy in the video mentions the distribution being a factor in the hype dying down. I think with a bigger distribution they could’ve worked better, the main issue with the Meta ones is that they’re basically made to record stuff inconspicuously and that’s freaking creepy.

  • Eh, in all honesty I think Trump isn’t that far off from the mindset of most corrupt politicians around the world, he’s just more blatant, less smart and has WAY more power. If you try putting yourself in the mindset of “I benefit from doing this and I have a HUGE cult of people that like that I’m doing this”, it makes sense.

    The only reason I think rehabilitation is not viable for him (besides, as I said, him being in a position where it’s impossible to make him face consequences), is because he’s really old and I don’t know if his brain is still capable of completely reshaping his thoughts. But I’m convinced that all the other “younger” terrible people (Musk, Tate, Shapiro and so on) could actually change if the whole world stopped giving them attention/praise and started saying “Hey, what you’re saying is fucked up and nobody likes you. We don’t want you in our society”. Of course, that’s a gigantic “if” because unfortunately they all have their own cult of people thinking they’re the messiah which constantly boosts their ego, but one can dream.

  • Oh and people from epstine’s Island have faced justice, outside of the USA and isreal…

    Eh, the only one that comes to mind is Prince Andrew, apparently Peter Mandelson too but I just found out. Every other person on the list has barely been questioned to my knowledge, and while most of them are American, it’s not all of them.

    In any case, it’s just an example of how, even given clear evidence of “something being wrong”, the law ultimately does nothing to most of the perpetrators. And it happens with the police, with giant corporations, with world politicians… I just don’t think anything would actually be done even if it was apparent that the test was discriminatory.

    And then of course, as you said, I don’t think this can realistically happen either with our current landscape, we’re just “whatif”-ing on the internet and that’s fine.

  • I… don’t know how I missed that parentheses, sorry if I basically reiterated what you already said lol

    In any case though, I still don’t believe in the existence of people physically incapable of empathy (well, outside of some mentally ill ones who lack more than just empathy), it’s just that some people are in a position where they’re never gonna realistically need to learn it in their entire lives.

  • I’m not really confident in what can or cannot be tracked considering there was an island where most of the world’s elites were flying to have sex with little girls and we started having the smallest idea after like 10 years.

    The fact that it would be obvious wouldn’t really matter either: first, reality itself has already been denied plenty of times (see the above “my abortion wasn’t an abortion”), and second, even if we all agreed that a group was being targeted… what of it? Would anyone be able to do anything about it? We have a huge list of people who have 100% been on Epstein’s island and therefore at minimum knew what was going on. How many suffered consequences? Is anyone arresting or prosecuting them yet?

    Sorry if this comes off as defeatist but recent years really made me lose most of the little faith I had in law and common sense. It feels like people in power WILL exploit any tool you give them for personal benefit and there’s gonna be nothing to stop them.

  • I in no way believe we couldn’t make a comprehensive intelligence and decision making ability test using international standards to prevent minority group targeting and peroperly sort out the stupids from everyone else

    I do believe that. Especially since whatever organization you task with that can still be bribed or manipulated.

    I’m personally partial to a different, more objective mechanism: we already restrict voting and eligibility for office for people that are too young, don’t we? Let’s do that for people that are too old too. Take the life expectancy of a country and anyone that’s beyond that can’t vote or hold office. You’ve already done enough to shape the country, now leave it to people that might actually get to keep living in it.

  • Personally disagree. Empathy doesn’t necessarily mean agreeing, it can also mean understanding why the other person is thinking like that, while still disagreeing with them.

    Being clear, I agree that shunning is the correct path, but it’s not because “you can’t have empathy for people who lack it”, it’s exactly because you understand that if you don’t shun them, they’re never going to change. The utopic end goal is that people understand why they’re being shunned and start rethinking their choices. Of course, if they don’t and they want to keep being shunned that’s still a positive for society, but we should still hope for them to change. It’s sort of like the (stated, unfortunately not factual) purpose of prison.

  • I very much suspect he’s going to run for President in my lifetime and win.

    Isn’t he born in Uganda, disqualifying him from being a candidate for President?

  • Unfortunately, these are all young people with a vast following of young people. Not to mention Charlie Kirk, Andrew Tate…

    Young people skew left and that’s a fact, it’s not a supermajority like it might seem on places like this.

  • It shouldn’t be treated as absolute truth but that doesn’t mean it’s not news or newsworthy. The title should’ve been less clickbaity though, sure.

  • I generally hate the principle of subscriptions + ads + paywalling stuff to viewers but not to crawlers, it’s pretty much double-dipping while baiting people for SEO.

    On the other hand, I understand that in this day and age keeping a news outlet afloat without “outside influence” requires doing stuff like this. It’s a hard thing to balance but in either case I appreciate the insight from your comment, I admit I didn’t look them up and I figured they were just another money-hungry megacorp-owned outlet.

  • Unfortunately it seems like the donator specified the usage in this case as well, but the courts are straight up ignoring it.

    On July 7, 1999, Bland’s descendants granted 87.97 acres of land to the “Texas Parks and Recreation Foundation, a Texas non-profit corporation, to be held in trust for future use as parkland by Williamson County, Texas,” according to a copy of the deed reviewed by 404 Media.

  • Not a lawyer either, but the article explicitly says “sold”, so I assume it’s not just leasing

    In 2003, the Texas Parks and Recreation Foundation granted the land to another non-profit called the Williamson County Park Foundation. A month later, that non-profit gave the land to the City of Taylor. Five years later, in 2008, the city of Taylor sold the land to the Taylor Economic Development Corporation (TEDC) for $15,000. In 2025, TEDC sold the land to Blueprint, the data center developers, for $10 million.

  • Technology @lemmy.world

    Artists dump X as launch of new AI image editing feature sparks outrage - Cryptopolitan

    www.cryptopolitan.com /artists-dump-x-ai-editing-outrage/