No need for a toy gun. “3D printed guns” are all actually 3D printed gun components, printed separately, and joined together separately, in almost all cases joined together with metal parts.

So it will stop you from printing a camera grip, as that’s the same as a gun grip. It will stop you from printing a flashlight body, as that’s the same shape as a silencer. It will stop you from printing a switch toggle, as that’s the same as a gun safety switch. Almost all “gun components” are parts with legitimate non-gun-related uses that cannot be distinguished until you see what they are actually used for. A “3D printed gun” is not a gun coming out of a printer, it’s lots of separate components coming out of a printer, in separate prints.

And of course the separate issue is that even if your prints are allowed, it means everything you manufacture is uploaded to an online service for judgement, where I’m sure it will be stored securely and not stolen/leaked.

So you do agree it’s seizing, which is all I said. I didn’t say anything about it being a realistic proposal.

While I don’t know how it elsewhere, I used to work at one of the big corpos.

Among many other interest groups like a book club or vegan club, there was an internal interest group for LGBT employees. It’s them who had to self-organise and push for the rainbow company logo and the like against pushback from leadership.

So while ultimately the decision to allow it probably was just a marketing calculation, it was actual LGBT employees making it happen, who had to work hard to get the company to recognize them, and definitely not the company pretending to care. The company didn’t care, and LGBT employees have to fight that to make these things happen.

There is definitely more multi-episode storylines and progression as the show goes on, but the problem remains that most of the time they can’t really keep amazing tech they find, because it would solve too many problems or make things boring.

It does occasionally happen though. Over the seasons they do accrue an impressive collection of tech which does carry over and is used in episodes going forward.

He wants to take over 50% of the companies without paying them. If that’s not seizing then I don’t know what is.

Edit: If the downvoters want to tell me where I’m wrong, I’d be glad to be corrected.

I just photoshopped my fake name onto a picture of an ID and they accepted it as proof.

I don’t think “correctly label FAT32 as FAT32 instead of a versionless FAT” is “lowering ourselves down”. In fact I’d say it’s the opposite, let’s be technically precise and correct, instead of a simplified label that confuses everyone.

And on the other issue, what do you have against file managers being able to mount a network drive? Yeah I can do it in fstab but if I could do it faster right from the file manager I would.

Why is making things better a problem? If Gnome add the mounting feature to their file manager in the future, you will be against it, talking about the good old days where real men edited fstab uphill both ways? Whom does that help?

Taking back half of their stolen profits seems like a step in the good direction though. Let’s seize their assets, starting with the half here, and then close them down.

You can, but 90% 3D printer buyers can’t, and that’s a good enough amount of people to spy on.

Polymarket skirts gambling laws by insisting it’s not gambling. Instead it’s legally registered as a futures market (or something like that, I don’t remember the details). So all bets are legally stock market trades.

Knowing that, it makes sense.

The dislike button never went anywhere. Do you mean the dislike counter?

I hate to break it to you but we are all irrelevant, being in Lemmy. We are already the outcasts.

A fellow passenger “saw the man at the front of the plane near the cockpit, in their words, kind of reach for a flight attendant and subsequently had multiple guys hold him back,” Rundle said.

So the guy wanted to get the flight attendants attention, and instead he got arrested and the plane diverted? I have to note the “multiple attempts to breach the cockpit” are nowhere in the actual article.

What journalism? This is the banned author posting on Twitter, they are the primary source, and could have said anything, including that Google didn’t give a reason, if they didn’t.

but does that really matter?

No, which is why I started my comment by saying it doesn’t matter.

AI moderation is bad regardless. Now that we have that settled, and have established Google is the bad guy here, I am interested what he was banned for.

No, why? I came up with an extreme example to illustrate my point: It’s suspicious that they didn’t say the reason for the ban, because if it’s a bad reason they would have said what it is.

I don’t imply any reason, especially the example I have given.

That’s the implications the narrative tries to create by saying the content is “his own”, and yet never spells it out, which is why it seems like a red herring to me.

Like, if it was his own CSAM, it doesn’t make it any better he is the author.

Not that it changes anything, but why nobody is saying, or asking, what was it flagged for? I find it suspicious the reason for the ban was not given in the story.

We start here: You see an URL -> if it’s a shortened URL, that’s problematic, if it’s a normal URL, it’s ok you can click it

Now we add a QR code to the equation: You scan a QR code -> You see an URL -> if it’s a shortened URL, that’s problematic, if it’s a normal URL, it’s ok you can click it

But you don’t agree.

Why is adding the “You scan a QR code” step making a difference? You compare looking at an URL to reading a 40 page EULA, I don’t think 1 line of text is comparable to 40 pages of text, but let’s go with it. Some people won’t read it, I definitely agree with that. If they click links without reading then, then they click links without reading them. Again, why is adding the step of scanning a QR code before the link shows up, making anything different? You can read and choose to click it or not all the same, whether the link appeared due to scanning a QR code, or whether it was on web page.

I don’t understand, why is a QR code a dark pattern?

Edit: I have now read the entire Wikipedia page on dark patterns, I didn’t find one that would match.