If we meet in the post-apocalyptic wasteland, but I have an android slave with a gun and you have nothing but a rusty spoon, it's going to be pretty clear who the android belongs to, and who it serves. The android also makes it likely that I will have a bunch of other nice stuff that you don't. Food and water, for instance.
Honestly it should probably just be illegal for anyone, private or public, to engage in mass surveillance (or "data gathering", whatever) of anybody who didn't expressly consent to it. As long as the data exist, they will be abused.
When I installed the SoundCloud app and it told me by continuing I agree to them sharing my data with their 954 partners.[1]
1. I’m not even joining. When I mostly recently installed the SoundCloud app - for the first time on a new device, that’s what’s it said: 954 partners. How can anyone reasonably understand what it is their agreeing to in that scenario.
This is the important point. You need the right to not be discriminated when you withhold your consent, otherwise your consent is effectively meaningless, as it is forced on you by your impossible bargaining position. This is one of the central pillars of the GDPR without which it wouldn't work at all. Be advised to make asking customers for consent that doesn't directly benefit them illegal as well, lest you risk creating another wave of malicious cookie banners.
> You need the right to not be discriminated when you withhold your consent, otherwise your consent is effectively meaningless, as it is forced on you by your impossible bargaining position.
Which is why "we don't serve patrons without shoes and pants" policy is unconstitutional, yeah.
If you don't want to agree to a business's demands — you're welcome to not deal with them and look for an alternative. All the alternatives have the same (or even worse) demands? Unless you can prove collusion, that's just how the invisible hand of the market worked its magic out. Go petition you congressman to violate laissez-faire even more than it already is, I guess.
The trouble with this is that I, at least, am trying to live in a society. And society has both rights and responsibilities. Sometimes you are forced to do things, or don’t do things, contrary to your desires. Every freedom has two sides, you can’t ignore the fact that increasing some freedoms for one decreases other freedoms for others.
The shirt and shoes example is a great example in fact that illustrates the point. You don’t have unlimited freedom to not wear shoes, just like a business does not have unlimited freedom to impose whatever terms it likes, just because it put it in its ToS.
> You don’t have unlimited freedom to not wear shoes
Okay, I am gonna be 100% serious here: you absolutely should have such a freedom. Just as loitering or jaywalking being a crime is inherently totalitarian, what the hell.
In this case, unlimited means literally everywhere.
You do have the right to go barefoot in your own home. And in true public spaces.
But, a property owner can require shoes. Do I care if somebody is barefoot in the local grocer? No, not really. But, the proprietor might because they want to limit their liability (should something fall on your foot, a cart run it over, or a loose tack/nail somehow land in an aisle, etc).
Except the are companies with which you effectively must do business.
Microsoft (or Apple).
Any web host, payment processor, etc that's contracted to do work for your local government (I suppose you could try driving to the government office and pay by check, but then you need to give consent to Ford or Chevy).
Short of living like a hermit, there's no practical way to avoid all ridiculous T&C.
Yes please. Your shaming didn't work. Free markets centre of gravity is biased towards capital and land owners. We need people power to balamce it back. Something we poor people are all enjoying now (pssst me and you are poor.... kings and barons are the few and rich)
I really need to start putting /s at the ends of my comments where I merely restate the currently adopted legal theory/framework in non-sugar-coated terms, don't I? The whole liberal movement has its roots in the merchants' and industrialists' desire of having as little interference from the aristocracy-heavy governments of the yore, and it really shows even to this day.
Not only that, but it should be illegal (eg: fines for the company and potential jail time for executives) for tying consent to use/purchase of services or products.
Reminds me of the sUAS legislation crushing the R/C flying hobby. Vague allusions to "safety" are constantly being thrown around, but in fact it seems that big companies are lobbying to claim the airspace for drone delivery and similar autonomous BVLOS operations.
Flying BVLOS is still illegal (including using goggles without a spotter) and basically nobody in the FPV hobby (non part 107) runs remoteid or registers their drones, even if they're over 250g. IDK what the AMA club field guys are doing, but they've all got FRIAs anyway.
In the FPV hobby, interest in smaller drones has increased, but I'm not really sure whether to attribute that more to regulations or just the fact that more components are available now to build smaller drones that can fly in public spaces without interfering with other people's usage, or even inside your own home. Overall it feels like the main impact of the regulations is to keep people away from the hobby entirely, since people who get into it inevitably start ignoring the more onerous rules sooner or later.
I'm expecting it to get worse, anyway. And the guys who fly DJI-style consumer drones are fucked, sub250 or not.
Idk what law in particular, but if this is about flying drones at low altitude in places where other people didn't show up to hear drones buzzing, I'd want it banned whoever is doing it.
No, the regulations I'm referencing have nothing to do with where (in the local sense) you can and can't fly drones. Even if I owned a thousand square miles in the middle of nowhere and wanted to fly a 75mm tinywhoop in the center of my own property, these regulations would affect me exactly the same as they would some jackass taking video of women sunbathing on a crowded beach with an 8" cinelifter. Typically local laws provide the recourse you're looking for.
"Democratize"? I thought that was when you rent an AI tool built on stolen intellectual property to write, draw, code, etc. for you because you never bothered to learn those skills yourself and convinced yourself they were being gatekept.
> When they say "We don't want to increase inequality" and the response is "We don't believe you". Where do you go from there?
The response is "we don't believe you" because their actions show that they are hellbent on accelerating inequality using AI and they have offered absolutely no concrete plan or halfway convincing explanation of how, if their own predictions of AI's future capabilities are correct, we're supposed to go from here and now to a future that isn't extremely dark for the vast majority of humans on Earth (to the extent that said humans continue to exist).
The work they have done in this direction so far is not serious, so it's not taken seriously. They obviously care much more about enriching themselves than slowing or reversing current trends.
If they want to be taken seriously, maybe they should start acting like they're serious about anything besides their own wealth and power. And I do mean acting---they need to show us through their actions that they are serious.
I understand that everyone has their own needs and Linux still might not be a great fit, but just in case it's helpful, here are some possibly-comparable Linux-friendly alternatives to what you mentioned:
> Fusion360
Depending on your needs, Onshape could be a good portable option since it runs in a browser. I use it for all my 3D printing pursuits and have made some fairly complex parts. And it's free if you don't mind people theoretically being able to search for and see your work. Not a problem for me since I'm not doing anything proprietary or making BDSM gear or whatever---if my shitty projects help somebody else with theirs, I'm all for it.
> OneNote
I don't think Obsidian does synchronous collaboration well (could be wrong) but for asynchronous collaboration it ought to be fine; their sync product works very well and I haven't ever had to fiddle with anything. My non-technical wife could use it with no issue (but in practice we use Apple Notes).
I don't think it's a drop-in replacement for OneNote, but it might serve the purpose.
> zero tolerance for needing to tweak settings to make a game work on Linux
This has gotten a lot better. With a distro like Bazzite (which I just use as my general purpose desktop now), pretty much everything works out of the box unless it has an anticheat that's specifically blocking Linux.
I would not have been willing to say this a year ago (and I know plenty of people have been saying it for a long time, and I generally disagreed with them), but today I really think gaming on Linux is ready for general adoption. In the last few months I've totally abandoned Windows for gaming, which was the last thing I was using it for (in a VM).
I'll check out OnShape. Between that and FreeCad (which recently got a usability update) I can probably kick AutoCad/Fusion360 to the curb.
Perhaps Linux can handle all of my computing needs. "pretty much everything works out of the box" is my bar. I don't play any of the games that use the linux-blocking anticheat. Death Stranding 2 is what I'm playing now and it looks like folks were able to get it running well on Linux. I'll probably move over within a year, assuming Microsoft continues on their current path.
> I don't think Obsidian does synchronous collaboration well (could be wrong) but for asynchronous collaboration it ought to be fine.
If you want to do real-time collaboration in Obsidian there are a few plugins available. relay.md (mine), peerdraft, screengarden, and YAOS are some options.
Personally I left Twitter less because Musk owns it now, and more because Musk's changes turned my previously tolerable feed into a deluge of far right drivel. Expecting me to keep using it is like expecting me to keep shopping at a grocery store that replaced its bread aisle with a swastika-festooned exhibit glorifying the conquests and exploits of Hitler and his Nazis---even if I am generally apolitical, I will have to start shopping somewhere that sells bread.
Notwithstanding the above, given how powerful network effects are in social media, I think boycotting platforms operated by people like Musk (I struggle to find the words to fully encompass how repulsive he has become) is arguably one of the more effective forms of protest available to people, and I encourage them to exercise it.
It's a trade-off. I love the convenience of ebooks, but not owning my books is just categorically unacceptable to me. I want my daughter and anyone else coming after me to have free access to them, not to have to jump through Amazon's hoops (if such hoops even exist) for access.
I have a Kobo that I use to read the non-DRM ebooks I'm able to acquire. One such source is downloads from the Kobo store, when publishers make the non-DRM file available.
I don't understand the fuss around liquid glass. I've been using Apple stuff since before OS X and this just feels like another redesign; I understand that there are some accessibility issues (that I thought Apple had at least partially addressed) but I don't have any problems using it. In fact, I kinda like it. It feels like many people latched onto an extremely negative narrative early on, and can't let go of it.
I have much more of a problem with the terrible window management on the mac and ipad OSs. Not being able to snap and resize windows to the edges of the screen, like every other standard window manager that exists, is insane (I know they added some version of this recently, but unsurprisingly it sucks). And the entire mac OS is starting to feel slow, bloated, and janky. They completely ruined the cmd-space search in their most recent major release. They need to get their house in order.
If you're going to say Apple's reputational hit from Tahoe, and Tahoe's many problems, are merely narrative-driven, you need to at least provide support for that. For example:
- why the added transparency effects don't present accessibility/usability issues, despite what users report
- why the corner radius change (among other UI changes), including its absurd size and broken handle detection actually aren't a big deal (even though every other window toolkit NOT swiftui has to be updated for it)
- why it's okay that they added useless icons to menus that add visual clutter and violate of their own design standards
- why Rosetta is going away, even though so many things still depend on it
The bigger issue is that Tahoe was a frivolous cosmetic update with only a few actual improvements, despite all of macOS's bugs that haven't been fixed over the years. That's a long list, from broken keyboard shortcuts in most their newer apps (and System Settings) to persistent Airplay compatibility problems.
Why is Apple's hardware getting objective better over the years while the possible software gains are squandered year after year?
I am talking about "liquid glass", which I understand to refer to the recent design language updates that include the much-bemoaned transparent/translucent design elements. I will repeat that I simply have not experienced myself having a negative reaction to these changes, even if you include corner radius changes and what you call "visual clutter" under the umbrella of "liquid glass"; I hardly noticed the former and didn't notice the latter at all. As for accessibility issues, I explicitly called them out in my comment.
Re: the rest of your comment, it seems like a real stretch to suggest that any of the following (quoting you) are within the scope of "liquid glass":
* Dropping Rosetta.
* Broken keyboard shortcuts in most their newer apps (and System Settings).
* Persistent Airplay compatibility problems.
* Other bugs that haven't been fixed over the years.
* Possible software gains being squandered year after year.
I clearly articulated in my comment that I have other problems with the current state of mac OS, so I'm not sure why you're implying that I'm claiming all the issues mentioned in your post are in the scope of "liquid glass" and therefore mainly narrative-driven.
It suggests to me that you didn't really read my comment before composing your reply.
> And the entire mac OS is starting to feel slow, bloated, and janky.
It appears you do indeed understand the fuss around Liquid Glass :)
The way I see it, "Liquid Glass" is used as a catch-all term to refer to all the UI changes across Apple's 2026 slate of user interfaces.
For one example, the annoying Apple Watch fitness app changes are "Liquid Glass" in my book because it exists only to show off the new wobbling refracting buttons,. The loss of performance and battery life is reasonably assumed to be tied to new Liquid Glass shaders Apple aspires to run 120 times a second on the phone.
The menu icons are really annoying, especially because some apps don't have them, and everything looks off-kilter. Finder sidebar morphing as the window resizes, also annoying.
But you're right, it's still usable, unlike the window management.
Lucky for me i convinced my boss to buy me a PC about a month after they forced the Tahoe update on my old work MBP
It's because it's vapid corpspeak coming from a class of people who have certainly spent time thinking about how they will deal with the rest of humanity in any number of nasty (however far-fetched) eschatological scenarios caused by them and in which they alone wield incredible power over nature and the human mind. And also because we all know the vast, vast, vast majority, possibly the totality of what people made with Sora did not matter at all.
This scenario is not meant to be taken literally.
reply