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/)N
Posts
14
Comments
2588
Joined
1 yr. ago

  • LOL. This isn't going to happen. Trump himself is an idiot but I'm sure there's someone on his staff who realises that this would decimate the US tech industry. This is another one of those TACO art of the deal type situations.

  • Not really. The desire to under pay people is stronger than the desire to have a workforce in the US.

    Also, the term "under pay people" is a complex one. Sure, it might be below average for a US citizen, but a great opportunity for someone from somewhere else.

  • Thankfully I haven't used discord in forever and won't need to in the foreseeable.

    That said, looking at this implementation it seems as though using option 1 their AI is just going to guess your age from looking at you. It might instruct you to turn this way or that, but it's just video or stills.

    It's only if their AI can't be confident that you're over 18 that you're referred to option 2, which requires ID.

    How easy will it be to emulate a camera device to help you work around option 1? I suspect very easy.

    Being 43, I'm not worried about passing the age restriction, I'm just hoping to avoid ever having to show my real face to a platform like this.

  • You're right that its a general trend, but there are exceptions.

    Australia presently has a progressive government, with the largest majority in living memory. Our conservative parties have been gutted.

    Granted, we have our share of dickheads, and id be happy to swap them for US lefties.

  • Ok sure, that's pretty irrefutable and I'm happy admit I was mistaken, as I did not know that aboriginals generally faced harsher sentences.

    Don't do crimes.

  • Oh please.

    This is the same pathetic study the other guy posted which I responded to elsewhere:

    Sorry, if you want to make a claim contrary to well established and generally accepted medical advice then you'll need much better evidence.

    The study you linked has a pathetically small scale of 120 individuals, is not randomised or placebo-controlled. Classic P-hacking. The result literally states that a better study is required.

    This meta study, which includes the one you linked, concludes that there is no effect on the duration of an infection.

    Out of the 1466 references found, 25 RCTs were included. There were two studies assessing mean fever clearance time, and five studies examining the duration of symptoms associated with the illness studied. No statistically significant differences were found when pooling the results of the different studies.

    Your advice is anything but "sound". The only sensible advice is to follow the advice of your health care professional, and we both know what that will be.

    Also, the other user you're talking to is not my alt account, I guess we just happen to have similar names. The only people who think people have "alt" accounts are idiots who think their profile is some kind of extention of their identity. You probably think your updoot count is somehow reassuring. Honestly.

  • Oh for fuck sake.

  • The first peer-reviewed study you've provided is titled:

    Institutional racism against Indigenous peoples in the Australian civil justice system: a call for justice and accountability

    The "civil justice system" refers to civil matters, like financial, business, property, or family disputes. There are no penalties, crimes, or sentences in civil justice. To put it plainly, it's just not relevant here.

    The second "peer-reviewed study" you've provided is not a study and is not peer reviewed, and similarly does not discuss criminal justice. This is included in the abstract:

    this article concentrates on the intersection between institutional racism in non-criminal justice settings

    Finally, the existence of a government strategy to mitigate racism in the justice system is not evidence of harsher penalties for minorities - quite the opposite in fact. Wouldn't you expect to find such a strategy as part of a healthy and fair justice system?

    You might be conflating over representation in the criminal justice system with harsher penalties. The former is certainly a significant problem, but it's not due to judges handing out harsher penalties.

    If I'm really honest, it kind of sounds like your opinion is based on the vibe, and you're trying to find evidence to support your position.

  • I'm so fucking sick of global leaders sucking up to Trump.

    He's a mask-off fascist and authoritarian.

  • Lock in

    Jump
  • I've been saying this for weeks.

    They dont fucking care about the Epstein files. They're not going to release anything incriminating.

    Meanwhile, the US has gone full mask off authoritarian fascism.

  • Lock in

    Jump
  • I've been saying this for weeks.

    They dont fucking care about the Epstein files. They're not going to release anything incriminating.

    Meanwhile, the US has gone full mask off authoritarian fascism.

  • While most Australians will acknowledge that there is inequality in the justice system, I don't think it's as brazen as this article is making out.

    Obviously you can disagree with any given case and based on the reporting this does seem like a lenient sentence.

    However, that doesn't mean the whole court system is prejudiced towards harsher penalties for our indigenous. I'm sure many young men and women of many races have been given lenient sentences. If there was a systemic issue that would be pretty easy to demonstrate statistically.

    I personally find the ABC's reporting a bit more balanced on this particular issue:

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-09-15/jake-danby-sentenced-over-fatal-hit-and-run-at-leanyer-in-2024/105773728

  • I'm in a difficult position here.

    Mozilla has taken a series of terrible strategic positions over the last decade and I'm not trying to make a case that any of those were good ideas, nor am I supporting the addition of this AI bullshit presently. I'll switch to whatever fork doesn't include these AI chat bots.

    That said, I do understand why mozilla leadership is moving in this direction.... for the millionth time, they're trying to attract the 98% of the market who presently doesn't use firefox, they're not trying to endear themselves to you - the 2% of the market who presently does use firefox.

    You can make a case that this particular feature is the wrong move, but ultimately you're arguing against extensive modelling and market research and strategic analysis conducted by a large sophisticated organisation with anecdotal insights.

  • I'm from the colonies.

    Sure is an embarrassment. Shameful.

  • Oh well. That's it then I guess.

  • That's kind of my whole point. Mozilla needs to be an option for people who are fine with chrome.

  • I don't think Robinson really fits neatly into a categorisation.

    Its hard to know what reporting I've read is accurate, and which isn't, but he seems like a person with a complex story.

  • I'm looking forward to reading the "proof" you'll undoubtedly provide any moment now.

  • I'm sorry if you're offended by being called a quack.

    It's a term often applied to those making bold medical claims without sufficient evidence.

    Sadly, if you want to make a claim contrary to settled medical science generally accepted the world over and applied in literally billions of cases each year, a study you found on google with 120 volunteers is... insufficient.