atx_aquarian

It seems obvious to me now.

Many US states are now requiring age verification for adult sites. VPN companies will benefit if that requirement expands. The Republican party's pearl-clutching politics are what can make that happen.

It'll be just like 2020: react after the damage is done and pretend they weren't complicit.

“Incomplete paper and online applications will not be accepted,” Evans said in the statement. (Parker’s [demonstration] cancellation request would have lacked a driver’s license number.) The Secretary of State’s Office did not respond to individual questions about what testing the portal underwent before launch, the system’s security procedures, what happened to Parker’s cancellation request....

Yeah, that tells us we just don't know if this was a problem after all. Evans's statement basically claims it wasn't a vulnerability. If that's correct, then the worst thing might be if someone's browser tripped on the validation JS and allowed them down a blind alley execution path. If the claim is correct and if the page's JS never shits the bed, then in that case the only negative outcome would be someone dicking with the in-browser source could lead themselves down the blind alley, in which case who cares. The only terrible outcome seems like it would be if the claim is incorrect--i.e. if an incomplete application submission would be processed, thus allowing exploit.

Short of an internal audit, there's no smoking gun here.

Source code escrow is a thing, too. I've only seen it in the context of (as I understood it) protection against going out of business, but perhaps it could apply to discontinued products, as well?

the product

If it's free, we're the product.

I think you're going to lose a few people with that first number being off by a decimal place, but the substance of what you said is still relevant and gives insight about the Lemmy experience right now.

Am I understanding this correctly? NOLA was arguing that, since they tax satellite radio for listeners in their city, they should be able to tax internet streams for the same listeners? If so, I feel like the two things should be comparably applicable (if it weren't for the ITFA), but also fuck all the way off, NOLA government. Get fucked, seriously.

What would give them standing? They'd have to be an entity protected by the constitution to claim that protection was harmed. Is it this (Wikipedia)?

TikTok Ltd was incorporated in the Cayman Islands and is based in both Singapore and Los Angeles. source

I guess I've never thought about what makes an entity have rights here. Buckingham Palace couldn't just open shop here and start suing our government, right?

I want:

• Zoom's...
  • ...annotation
  • ...richer reactions
• Teams's...
  • sensible screen layout
  • richer chat content
  • chat continuity before/during/after meetings
  • very granularly customizable avatars
• Some other tool's composition interface for chat text

Yeah, I remember learning about it in a CS class and, specifically, the claim that it's an ideal standard candle kind of image. I always wondered if we couldn't have found a better reference shot of a smooth flower growing in front of a rough stone or something.