Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | Recurecur's commentslogin

It actually doesn’t look too bad if the canal ran on the west side of the mountains…

One hopes that will be a moot point once the Islamists fall in Iran.


This entire effort at “age verification” needs to die in a fire.

Keep the data protection laws, remove the max age cut off. I want data protection too! No need to verify age.

Amen.

But won't anyone think of the little children?!? The US president and his close friends sure do. /s

I dunno.

I mostly agree with you, mostly because I don't like being tracked, and I don't like the surveillance state.

But, I mean, kids probably shouldn't be looking at porn. Arguably no one should be viewing porn but it's probably especially bad for young, developing minds to be watching that kind of stuff, and if we agree that kids shouldn't be watching porn then maybe we should be doing a cursory effort to make it so they're not?

It's easy to say "no it's the parents' responsibility", but let's be honest with ourselves. My parents tried child blocks for me so that I won't look at unsavory websites when I was thirteen, and those worked for about twenty minutes until I figured out how to get around them, and eventually reformatted my hard drive with OpenSUSE so my parents wouldn't be able to try again. Kids find a way.

So I dunno, maybe things should be on the provider sometimes?


Yeah the world is not going to end if some teenage boys get to see some naked breasts. All this effort could be invested into providing decent sexual education to teenagers instead.

The world isn't going to end if a teenage boy sees a booby, but I think that it can distort a teenager's view on sex and sexuality. I think that part of the disturbing woman-hating incel "movement" might be, at least in part, a result of a lot of very stupid guys seeing distorted views sex and seeing a lot of media where objectifying women is rewarded. [1]

Also, porn nowadays isn't just a woman showing a titty; if you go on PornHub or something, it is all pretty hardcore now.

I agree that good sex education is ideal, but I still think that we probably shouldn't be allowing kids to watch porn.

[1] Also, who actually pays for the pizza???? I mean, there's no such thing as a free lunch. Pizza should count as lunch, or at least dinner. Are all these horny housewives ordering pizzas with no way to pay for it making the prices of my pizza go up?


Interesting you mention pizza. Fast food fucks people up a lot worse than porn.

I was making a joke about the old porn trope of "delivering a pizza with no way to pay for it", but honestly I think you could make a pretty solid argument that we shouldn't be feeding that to children either, and maybe we shouldn't be letting parents do that regularly.

[I removed this post because it was a long boring cliche. Sorry.]

Let's pretend for a moment that age verification has anything to do with protecting kids.

If we agree that nobody should be viewing porn because it makes us worse human beings, then maybe we should be wondering why producing it is permitted in the first place?

I have no definitive opinion on the topic, like everyone I am torn between desire for individual freedom and desire for effective collective measures. I wish I lived in a world in which we could regularly and scientifically assess the costs and benefits and just enact policies accordingly.


> If we agree that nobody should be viewing porn because it makes us worse human beings,

I'm not necessarily saying that it's bad for adults to be viewing porn. I think there's an argument to be made that it's bad for all humans, though I personally don't think I subscribe to it. Since I don't think it's inherently bad for an adult to watch it, I don't think there should be prohibition on producing it.

I mean, let's rewind back to before the internet; if I thirteen year old wanted to view porn they couldn't easily go to a store and buy it, and even if they did get some the stuff that was easily available, to my understanding, was tame compared to what you get on PornHub. If a kid got a Playboy or caught something late-night on Skinemax, they'd see a booby and some obviously fake moaning, not hardcore stuff you get on pretty much any site.

Obviously this kind of stuff doesn't affect everyone the same way. Many, many, people looked at porn when they were teenagers and most of them aren't incels or creeps, but I don't think it's something that kids should really be viewing. I think drawing the line at "adult" vs "not adults" is a good enough demarcation.


Is it ok for adults because they are accustomed to it already? Or is it because they know better how to use the internet? In either case nobody would suffer from the disappearance of disturbing violent porn but the few ones who make money out of this industry.

The hard question remains: what individual freedoms are we willing to sacrifice for this? Is it worth a Prohibition like policy? Online surveillance?

But in all seriousness, let's not pretend this has anything to do with kids' safety. This is just one more step from the global village towards the safe shopping mall.


> Is it ok for adults because they are accustomed to it already?

I think it’s ok for adults because they aren’t nearly as confused and developing sexually. I think an adult viewing porn is more likely to be able to contextualize it as fiction/fantasy than a young teenager.

> But in all seriousness, let's not pretend this has anything to do with kids' safety. This is just one more step from the global village towards the safe shopping mall.

Ok but that’s why I am conflicted about it. I don’t know the motivations of lawmakers, I am saying my perspective.


Tesla FSD is currently very good, and I think _on average_ is better than the typical driver (no distractions, no substances, no fatigue, 360 deg vision, faster reaction time). Granted, that isn’t helpful if you hit an edge case.

Still, I think overall it’s a good thing.


Aren’t common things like children walking into the road still problems that Tesla can’t handle?

FSD seems pretty okay when it's supervised. But Tesla is cagey about the safety issues. They keep trying to SLAPP people who report on problems. It also doesn't help that Elon Musk slashed the NHTSA after they began investigating the issue.

I guess I'm in a wait and see position about FSD.


You should read up on “false equivalence”…

> You should read up on “false equivalence”…

You should read up on "Terrorists or Freedom Fighters":

* https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/terroris...

* https://harvardlawreview.org/forum/no-volume/on-terrorists-a...


I believe the OP's point was precisely that there's no objective true and false equivalence - there's just forces trying to impose a narrative which one is which.

::multiple laughing emojis::

Our “models of climate change” have regularly been falsified at this point. It is absolutely unknown how much “climate change” is attributable to humans right now.

Nor is it actually known what the net favorability of mild warming might be…including the possibility of mitigating the next Ice Age!



Oh, you mean the guy that benched 315 lb the other day? The guy who’s led the US military flawlessly through several major operations over the last year?

Check your news sources…


Don’t panic too much yet, there are other legal bases for the tariffs.

We’ll see…


In my opinion, LLMs provide one piece of AGI. The only intelligence I’ve directly experienced is my own. I don’t consciously plan what I’m saying (or writing right now).

Instead, a subconscious process assembles the words to support my stream of consciousness. I think that LLMs are very similar, if not identical.

Stream of thought is accomplishing something superficially similar to consciousness, but without the ability to be innovative.

At any rate, until there’s an artificial human level stream of consciousness in the mix for each AI, I doubt we’ll see a group of AIs collaborating to produce a significantly improved new generation of AI hardware and software minus human involvement.

Once that does happen, the Singularity is at hand.


So, I was downvoted twice, yet neither of you doubtless brilliant individuals bothered to refute my points.

I’ll emphasize my main point further, LLMs have no ability to innovate much beyond the vast data they’ve scraped. They’re almost entirely derivative.

They are a definite improvement over traditional search engines though!


Your points seem to boil down to "it hasn't happened yet, so it will never happen".

There really isn't much to engage with.


It’s well understood that the expansion of the universe is not “due to general relativity”. General relativity does explain some details of that expansion.


The equations of general relativity fully model the expansion of the universe, so you’d need to explain what you mean.


The expansion of the universe is largely due to the impulse provided by the Big Bang. General Relativity does attempt to explain some details regarding what’s happened after the Big Bang, but provides no insight into the Big Bang itself. Nor does it offer insight into Dark Energy, a concept that Einstein opposed.


yeah, that extra bit that Einstein was very embarrassed about having to write, the bit that says "... plus the expansion of the universe"

It explains nothing. It's just tacked on the end there.


FTL starships in an SF story don’t need a detailed explanation, just a new invention.

It’s the exact same thing as a speculative story in the 1920s discussing supersonic flight, even though the jet engine hadn’t been invented yet.

For instance “Tunnel in the Sky” bypassed the whole issue in the 50’s, later imitated by “Stargate”…


True but at that point objects travelling faster than sound had been demonstrated.

It was just hard to engineer a manned plane that could do it. For example during WWII the V2 rockets travelled much faster than sound. They were just unmanned. Or more simple, bullets were supersonic for longer too.

What I mean is, nobody thought the sound barrier was a hard limit we could never break.


Just specify an Alcubierre drive. Job done.


Massive implications from that

A magic unobtainium drive which works in a consistent way is fine, just call it “hyperspace” or whatever

There’s a difference between hard sci-fi and soft sci-fi, but they are both still sci-fi, you can tell optimistic stories of the future with a “battle drive”, as long as you keep it consistent. If the drive cancels relativity effects and allows travel at 5000c that’s fine. Just ensure you travel at 5000c, no hoping across the galaxy in a few days, but travelling to another star in a few days or even hours is fine.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: