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

> It's clear how insane this culture war against trans people is when you consider this only applies to trans women and not trans men?

In most sports, the "mens" division is actually an open division that accepts all participants regardless of sex. Women just don't compete in it because they have no shot at getting a decent placement. The fact that males and females can't fairly compete with each other is the raison d'être of the women's league. This, and not culture war propaganda reasons is why only the most deranged bigots have an issue with trans men competing in "mens" sports.


Fun fact: "open divisions" only last as long as men are winning them. Women often outshoot men, and after Shan Zhang's win they were siloed into their own division.

> Fun fact: "open divisions" only last as long as men are winning them. Women often outshoot men, and after Shan Zhang's win they were siloed into their own division.

That decision was made before her win.

> the International Shooting Union, at a meeting in April of 1992, and therefore ahead of the Games, elected to bar women from shooting against men in future events.

<https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/2753773/2021/08/05/in-tokyo...>


The EU is perfectly capable of collaborating even when it can't reach full consensus or when it wants to include peripheral states without them becoming full members. See for example the Schengen area, Eurozone, European Economic Area, and more recently (and specifically to circumvent member state vetos) when the enhanced cooperation procedures were invoked to lend money to Ukraine.

People who live in authoritarian states like North Korea or California can (and arguably should) ignore the fact that GrapheneOS is illegal where they live and use it anyway.

As the complexity of a system increases, the number of single points of failure also tends to increase. Sometimes you can make sure that several subsystems need to fail before the whole system fails. Often, the best you can do is swap one SPoF (e.g. unreliable power grid) for another, more robust SPoF (unreliable UPS).

"Actual malice" is confusingly not about if the defendant was acting maliciously. It is specific legal jargon meaning that the defendant knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth made the false statements.

One of the songs claims he fucked one of the deputies' wives; I presume that, at least, fits it. (Unless it's true.)

Going on the stand and stating that you "don't know" whether the allegedly defamatory statements you are suing over are true or not is a... bold legal strategy.

Or claiming you don't know what crime your brother was charged with that led him to resign from the same police department.

The ACLU called it a SLAPP lawsuit. If true, they probably didn't care if they won or not.

That said, going on stand when your opponent has proven they can and will use your words and actions against you in the court of public opinion is a... bold strategy.


Honestly it was pretty ballsy of Afroman to release songs during the trial (which did come up, but I think they sort of ignored due to some law that changed in 2024?)

>Going on the stand and stating that you "don't know" whether the allegedly defamatory statements you are suing over are true or not is a... bold legal strategy.

if the statement is true, that's a defense against defamation.

if the statement is not believable, that is also a defense against defamation.

it actually was legal strategy designed to dance around the legal strategy behind those questions being asked, taking the air out of your insult


Are you saying you believe the cop who said, under oath, he "doesn't know" whether his wife could be having an affair with afroman chose to do that as part of a deliberate legal strategy? And that you think this casts him in a more positive light than merely being clueless?

I think comment was alleging perjury.

They do know the statement is true (and this is provable). Pretending like they "don't know" is a lie under oath.


That wasn't actually what I was implying. Just that if the plaintiff isn't even willing to assert that the statements were false, what are you wasting the court's time for?

  > He falsely claimed my wife is cheating on me!
  > So you assert that your wife didn't cheat on you?
  > No.
  > ???

Technically, the burden of proof is on the defendant.

This particular slope has consistently had people pratfalling over and over again for hundreds of years.

If there's no information provided beyond proof-of-age, what's stopping my friend's 18 year old brother from lending his ID to every 14 year old at school? IRL that's negated by the liquor store clerk looking at the kid who is obviously underage and seeing that his face doesn't match the borrowed card he just nervously presented.

> what's stopping my friend's 18 year old brother from lending his ID to every 14 year old at school?

MitID is 2fa. You log in with username, then you have to open the app, enter password or scan biometric, then scan the QR code of the screen* and you are logged in.

He would need to be next to you every time you log in. I think that is too high friction to make it feasible on large scale.

* Assuming you open the website on the Desktop, and MitID on phone. If both on phone, skip this step.


If people have to go through OS auth flow each time they open a website, that will drive everyone mad. One of the key motivators for politicians is not making everyone mad, so the polls don't drop.

Also, I reckon most children know the password for their parent's phone or computer, and many more will find out if there is a highly motivational factor for doing so. How many exhausted parents just toss their phone to their child to stop them whining?

I suppose it could be a biometric sign-in with facial recognition or fingerprint, but again, that's a tonne of friction for the whole web.


Most people use biometric for MitID, but yes you can set up pin login. Hopefully not the same as your phone login :D

It's already the single sign on for government websites, banking, healthcare, digital post, insurance, law (sign contracts) etc.

Shit man, you can get divorced through that. I really hope most parents don't give their kids access to it.


That's how the user interface works. What is it doing at the protocol level? What stops someone from building a service that mints anonymous verification codes on a massive scale and distributes them to anyone who asks? Maybe with the user interface being an app kids can download to scan any QR code and pass verification.

I don't know. I would assume the account gets blocked if you do it on a larger scale, so you have to rotate account, which gets expensive fast as it's not easy to steal them?

> He would need to be next to you every time you log in.

Or you can just text him a screenshot of the QR code. You could probably even automate this.


No, the QR code is changing every couple of seconds.

~Maybe~ you can video call, but again it's adding so much friction. Nothing is 100% secure.


The automated attack setup I'm envisioning is something like: 18 year old buys a cheapo laptop + phone and connects the two over ADB or some purpose built automation app (think appium). 18 year old puts the phone on a tripod pointed at the laptop screen. 14 year olds at school pay $10 a year for use of the service and install a browser extension that forwards the QR codes from whichever service they wanna use to the 18 year old's computer. Changing every couple of seconds is not an issue here, they all live in the same city and have <10ms ping.

The only high friction part of this is that someone needs to write the software for it, but that doesn't seem like all that difficult of a project and open source solutions are likely to appear within weeks of social media requiring it. If there really is no information shared with the other party beyond "yup, user is over the age of maturity" you could even run this as a free public TOR service without fear of ever getting caught.


Mhh, but then the Danish Agency for Digitisation will see that the 18 year old does a lot of age request on all day and night long. And block his account. And then he can't use his own banking, health, postal apps.

High risk, low reward.

If he throttles request to stay under a threshold, if the agency knows about it service they could use it and see which account does age requests at the same time.


Ah, so it does leak your identity through the timing side channel. In other words, your anonymity is only dependent on the govt not coordinating with service providers to de-anonymize users. I assumed the 2fa app just held cryptographic keys and did some 0kp magic to show that the cert belongs to a government-attested adult. Phoning home all the time makes it trivial for the government to abuse people's privacy; they can just compel service providers to provide logs of logins.

Well right now THAT service does not even exist. The SSO exist, the anonymous age verification was an idea from another user here. Instead of sending (face)data to a private 3rd party.

My general point is that you can have anonymity or you can prevent ID spoofing, but the two are mutually exclusive.

For video games it is pretty bad, because reading back a page from disk containing "freed" (from the application perspective, but not returned to the OS) junk you don't care about is significantly slower than the OS just handing you a fresh one. A 10-20ms delay is a noticeable stutter and even on an SSD that's only a handful of round-trips.

Games today should be using ZGC.

There's a lot of bad tuning guides for minecraft that should be completely ignored and thrown in the trash. The only GC setting you need for it is `-XX:+UseZGC`

For example, a number of the minecraft golden guides I've seen will suggest things like setting pause targets but also survivor space sizes. The thing is, the pause target is disabled when you start playing with survivor space sizes.


Overall if java hits the swap, it's a bad case. Windows is a like special beast when it comes to 'swapping', even if you don't truly needed it. On linux all (server) services run with swapoff.

>Yeah I'm not seeing how this is supposed to work

You could verify the ID of an adult who vouches for the child they are a legal guardian of. That way, if it turns out that Brayden(M12) is actually Linda(F45) you know who to send law enforcement to to ask some very pointed questions.

That said, I don't think online ID verification is effective and even if it was, it wouldn't be worth the level of mass privacy invasion. If your goal is actually to help kids who are victims of abuse, your efforts are much better spent elsewhere. For example: making child abuse report hotlines/websites more easily accessible and widely known, fixing social services so that they actually provide better help when requested instead of making things worse, better education for children about what is and is not OK behavior even from "trusted" adults, and how to get help from someone who isn't a relative when you need it. "Stranger danger" hysteria catches all the outrage and public discussion, but is the least common source of abuse.


> fixing social services so that they actually provide better help when requested instead of making things worse

Agreed, and I wish more people would realize this. When I was a kid, one of my friend's brothers was accused of molestation. The accused kid was around 8 or 9 and the victim was around 5 or 6. The social services came in and immediately got the mom fired from her job (she was a school teacher), put the family through tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees, utterly disrupted the lives of the entire family, got the accused kicked out of school and put in a special school for troubled kids (which itself brought a whole host of issues), and nearly ripped the family apart. There was no evidence at all of the crime, other than the word of the accuser (a 5 or 6 year old child). Fast forward a few years later and the accuser apologized profusely and admitted that it had never happened. Oh and also the accused was at a friend's house at the time of the supposed molestation, and the friends' parents had told the investigators that. Law enforcement dropped the case having determined it not likely to be true and certainly nowhere near the evidence for prosecution (in fact, there was evidence that the event never happened), but social services proceeded with all of the above anyway. So yeah, there's a lot of work to do to make anybody want to trust them to help rather than make everything worse.


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

Search: