Worked for me as well. Hopefully my account of 11+ years isn't penalized because of this. Not like it matters because I'll quit anyways if forced to send my face or ID.
You probably won't even have to validate then. I guess they can safely assume that you didn't create your account when you were 7 years or younger. They said they expect 80% of users or so to be auto-verified by some other means (account age, typing statistics, whatever)
Lots of websites assume you are located in the country where your IP address is, and thus apply the rules for that country. So perhaps if someone wanted to use heuristics instead of uploading an ID, they could pretend to be in the UK by using a VPN.
Legislatively, the UK is among the stricter regimes wrt online age verification. It's a place you want to be VPNing out of. Discord is apparently rolling this out worldwide out of their own free will, not due to legislative pressures.
to be fair, you don't need a credit card to create a Discord account. And yes, I don't think there are ZERO seven-year-olds on Discord. I just think the number is pretty dang small
Ah, brings back memories of being a Silicon Graphics Customer Support Engineer based in London and the Home Counties, back in the late 90's and early 2000's.
Indy, Indigo, then later the Octanes, and others I can't quite remember the name of off-hand.
The video post-production companies in SOHO - I saw the CGI being rendered for Event Horizon...
The "IBM Stiction Problem" as it was called. Batches of IBM hard drives that worked fine for months - right up until the machines were powered off - which then entailed an on-site visit. The stifled gasp from the customer as I remove the old drive and give it a stern tap on the desk, to get it unstuck so I could clone it to the replacement. ;)
Enjoyed that job immensely, except for the driving around London bit.
Bush Porn. Here in Scotland, way back when I was, oh, 7, 8, 9 years old, always stumbled across discarded porn magazines in the woods I used to play in. Moved area when I was 11, once again, always used to stumble across discarded porn. Bush porn was a thing.
I have a grandfather who shared Scottish ancestry. In the "woods" of suburban Los Angeles he found some porn in the alleyway, and then stashed it under the "davenport" couch. My grandmother found it while cleaning in anticipation of our departure. I'll never forget the look on his face as he tried to extricate himself from that mess.
"Bush Porn" is a funny term. If you invented it, nice work.
I seem to be the only person (along with 3 others who were my cow-orkers) who ever used or heard of Teknicad , running on Tektronix Unix workstations and terminals :)
- This is a GUI application I wrote 10 years ago. It even has a full WYSIWYG emulation of the xrdp login screen, which you can use to customize the look of it! All written in Python and PySide. It was originally meant to be a commercial product that I'd sell. Turns out there was no market for it and no one seems interested in it. Oh well!
- This was a shell script which automatically built and installed the Xrdp server on Debian based systems. Was quite popular back in the day but became kinda obsolete, which was good.
- reads in a Policykit .policy file, parses its XML contents, and presents the information it contains, on a more human-readable GUI window. This seems to be useful to folks and someone even created an Arch Linux AUR for it, which was nice. I perhaps should try to update it so that it works with more modern versions of Python and PySide.
That last one. Hmmm. It's been a hot minute since I even thought about it, but someone recently created an issue to do with getting it running with python 3.12, so maybe I should have a peek at it once again...
The author of the article, I agree with. It's OK to abandon things. XRDPConfigurator is what I used to learn Python and Qt (with a naive goal of making income from it). That application took a year and bit of my time. I'm particularly proud of the Xrdp emulation, and the WYSIWYG editing of the Xrdp login screen layout! But spending any more time on it was wasted time. I open-sourced it after taking out all the nasty - and self-designed - registration (DRM) stuff I'd also had (which spoke to a central registration server and was Very Clever[tm] With No Chance Of Being Bypassed! ( /s ), and promptly just left it stewing in stasis. And no one was really interested in it, either. I guess Xrdp just isn't sexy enough for folks ;)
> But I would like to thank all the people here who think testing is useless for their attitude. You make my job easier while hiring.
That's fine.
I've never written a test in my life. Have my programs ever had bugs? Sure. But I sleep very well at night knowing that I spent all my brain power and time writing actual code that Does Useful Work rather than have wasted significant lengths of my time on this planet on writing test code to test the code that does the Useful Work.
You speak of attitude and smugly "thank" those who don't write tests as that acts as your hire-or-not filter. With an attitude like that, I'd 100% not work for anyone with that attitude anyway.
> I've never written a test in my life. Have my programs ever had bugs? Sure. But I sleep very well at night knowing that I spent all my brain power and time writing actual code that Does Useful Work rather than have wasted significant lengths of my time on this planet on writing test code to test the code that does the Useful Work.
And that’s why I never want to have to work with you on anything shipping to a user ever.
Don’t get me wrong, the field is riddled with people who think testing is beside them and wash their hand with the quality of what they ship and what they put their users through. That’s an issue to fix not a situation we should tolerate.
> Don’t get me wrong, the field is riddled with people who think testing is beside them and wash their hand with the quality of what they ship and what they put their users through. That’s an issue to fix not a situation we should tolerate.
See, this is my point. It's not that testing is beside me, it's that my stuff gets tested anyway.
Here's the test: Does it fucking work or not?
You do that by running the thing. If it explodes, find out why and fix it. Job done. No thought or line of code was wasted in writing tests, all brain power was used to initially write a piece of code - which initially had a bug of course - and then said bug was fixed.
My code gets tested. By people using it. Or by me testing it as I write it ("does it fucking work").
There is really only one test.
You can choose to expend your brainpower and time on this planet writing code that will never actually be run by an end-user, or you can just write the fucking code that the end-user will run. That's how I work. Write it and run it. That's the test.
Test code written to test Useful Working Code is time wasted. It's like putting stabiliser wheels on bicycles - you're either gonna be stuck forever riding a bike with stabilisers, or you grow up and rip them off and have a few falls on the bike then become confident and competent enough to ride that bike without them. And have more freedom and time to experiment and go places you couldn't when they were put on.
So yeah. I definitely wouldn't work with people who like wasting my and their time on this Earth.
Write it. Run it. It either does what it's supposed to or not. If it doesn't, find out why and fix it. Or discover that your function/code abstraction/thought was shit in the first place then write it differently - oh and that's the worst part about writing code that tests the Code That Does The Work; say you discover that the function you're writing was a load of bollocks and needs to be highlighted and simply erased - there goes all that test code you spent brainpower and time, with it, too. And now you have to spend even more time writing new test code to test the Code That Actually Does Useful Work.
> Write it. Run it. It either does what it's supposed to or not. If it doesn't, find out why and fix it
That's called functional testing and that's actually testing. You are one step removed from actually formalising what you do and getting non regression testing for free. At that point, I think you are either arguing fot the sake of it and do actually realise that testing is important or somehow confuse testing with unit testing which is only a narrow subset of it.
Congratulations. I already told you I test my programs. The discussion is about expending brain power and time writing hundreds of lines of code to test the intended user-facing code, which, in my opinion, is just dumber than a bag of hammers.
There is no fire/combustion involved when vaping. Vaping is when a liquid is heated up enough to turn it into a vapour. The same process as heating water enough turns it into steam. That's it. The liquid will have flavourings and nicotine added to it, meaning the vapour produced will deliver said flavourings and nicotine to the person inhaling it. The exhalation will contain remnants of that vapour along with just water vapour - most of the flavourings and nicotine will be absorbed by the person who inhaled it.
I always get puzzled as to why people say they are /disgusted/ by vaping, or why they equate combustion based smoking with the non-combustion based conversion of a liquid into a vapour. Help me understand you. What part disgusts you about vaping? That you can see a cloud of water vapour being exhaled? Have you ever been out somewhere where a fog machine is being used? Congratulations, because the liquid used for the fog machines is mostly the same as used in vapes and also asthma inhalers.
You might as well get "disgusted" by the fact that if you are in a room with another person, you'll inevitably be inhaling part of that other person's exhalation! I guess that's okay though, because their exhalation products aren't visible to you?
narrator> And that's when he discovers his account has now been hacked...
;)