You could argue that our way of life in wealthy countries is impossible without the exploitation of the third-world. Does that mean we are a higher class of humans? No.
Let’s just strive to be as harmless as possible and leave our grand philosophical ideas about who is better than who aside.
Not everything is black and white. You are painting a picture where we have two options: (1) cause as much harm as we please and not worry about the consequences, or (2) cause no harm at all by eradicating our species from the face of the Earth (which would actually cause a lot of harm to members of our species but we’ll sidestep that for now).
But this is of course a false dichotomy. Because there are degrees to this. A vegan diet is undoubtably less harmful, both in its carbon footprint and in the direct harm in causes to other species. So if someone wants to reduce the amount of harm they are causing it’s the way to go. So why try to diminish that with this ridiculous dichotomy between death to all humans or unmitigated animal torture? If someone wants to decrease of amount of harm they are causing shouldn’t we be encouraging this sort of prosocial mindset?
Does this data take into account that any posts on Lemmy/Piefed are automatically also posts on Mastodon (and comments are replies) but this doesn’t necessarily happen the other way around?
I think the reason why people decided to go with Bluesky is because it’s easier to sign up for. Most people on here are pretty technically inclined, so its hard for them to understand, but the process of picking a server to make an account on is complicated enough to screen out a sizeable fraction of potential users (then waiting for your application for that server to be approved creates an other hurdle for certain people).
Interesting thank you. The integrated drivers thing would make it difficult to hack but I guess its always possible to crack the smoke alarm and replace the drivers, if someone really wanted to get their hands dirty
Obviously there are limits, like if you're actively harming people such as in the example you gave. But so long as you aren’t harming anyone I don’t see why you shouldn’t be able to do what you like with the land you own (such as, for example, letting the plants grow freely).
Yeah. The OS based biometric model of verification definitely has some advantages over a service-by-service form of verification (so long as it's done in a way that doesn't make it easier to fingerprint based on device). The biggest concern I'd have though would be what this might do to niche operating systems, like Linux distros or Graphene OS. Will they be forced to enable age verification as well, and if so will they have the means to do that?
The comparison to credit card verification is interesting though and intuitively it seems like it would make it easier for niche operating systems to manage these requirements, since they could largely outsource that functionality (in the same way most websites outsource the handling of credit card information). This model still might make it easier for governments to profile people though. I'd be interested to hear what a privacy expert has to say about the viability or tradeoffs with a model like that.
Yeah. Then it destroys traditional search engines by overrunning them with slop